9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... till proceeds with the arbitration without raising an objection, as soon as possible, waives their right to object. High Court had appointed an arbitrator - If further objections were to be made after this order, they should have been made prior to the first arbitration hearing. But the appellants had not raised any such objections. The appellants therefore had clearly failed to meet the stated requirement to object to arbitration without delay. As such their right to object is deemed to be waived. - appeal dismissed. - Civil Appeal No. 5618 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 18-2-2014 - Surinder Singh Nijjar And Ranjana Prakash Desai,JJ. ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Union of India challenging the judgment and order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed statement of defence. Upon completion of the arbitration proceedings, the learned arbitrator made the award on 25th January, 2002. The claims of the respondent were accepted and the award was rendered in favour of the contractor in the sum of Rs.1,29,89,768/-. Aggrieved by the aforesaid award, the appellant filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 before the High Court for setting aside the award. The learned single judge of the High court dismissed the aforesaid application of the appellant on 28th October, 2003. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant filed Intra-Court appeal before the Division Bench of the High court, which has also been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 15th June, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statement of defence. Furthermore, the appellant also led evidence in defence. He also pointed out that the appellant, in fact, categorically accepted the jurisdiction of the learned arbitrator by filing a counter claim in the proceedings. He submits that, in such circumstances, the appellant had clearly waived its right to object to the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. Similarly, the plea of excepted matters was also never raised by the appellant during the entire arbitration proceedings. All claims have been decided on merits. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. The arbitration agreement contained in clause 64 of the General Conditions of Contract is as under: 64(3)(a) ARBITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be, shall give the award on all matters referred to arbitration indicating therein break-up of the sums awarded separately on each individual item of disputes. In cases where the claim is more than Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh), the Arbitrator(s)/Umpire so appointed, as the case may be, shall give intelligible award (i.e. the reasoning leading to the award should be stated) with the sums awarded separately on each individual item of dispute referred to arbitration. 3(b) For the purpose of appointing two arbitrators as referred to in sub-clause (a)(ii) above, the Railway will send a panel of more than three names of Gazetted Railway Officers of one of more departments of the Railway to the contractor who will be asked to suggest to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ided that two arbitrators shall nominate an Umpire who shall be a Gazetted Railway Officer. Since the Arbitration Act, 1940 had been repealed by the Arbitration Act, 1996 the provision in the arbitration agreement for appointment of two arbitrators and an Umpire had become redundant. Accordingly, the respondent requested the Railways to appoint the sole arbitrator. Since the Railways failed to appoint the arbitrator within 30 days of the receipt of the letter dated 30th September, 1996, the respondent moved the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996 for appointment of a sole arbitrator on 3rd January, 1997 before the High Court. As noticed above, by order dated 10th July, 1998, the High Court appointed Mr. Justice S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction before the Arbitral Tribunal cannot be permitted to raise for the first time in the Court. Earlier also, this Court had occasion to consider a similar objection in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and another versus Motorola India Private Limited [(2009) 2 SCC 337]. Upon consideration of the provisions contained in Section 4 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, it has been held as follows: 39. Pursuant to section 4 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a party which knows that a requirement under the arbitration agreement has not been complied with and still proceeds with the arbitration without raising an objection, as soon as possible, waives their right to object. The High Court had appointed an arbitrator in response to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
