9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 260X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is the date of service of notice of the filing of the award. Section 14(2) of the 1940 Act requires that the court of relevant jurisdiction should give notice to the concerned parties when an award is filed. While Art. 119(b) of the Limitation Act requires that there be a service of notice for the limitation to start running, Section 14(2) of the 1940 Act merely states that court give notice to the parties. The precise form of what constitutes as a notice of filing the award is unspecified. However, interpreted reasonably, what must be required is that the parties come to know about the existence of the award so that any objections to it may be filed. What appears from the usage of the word notice is that the parties merely reach a state of awareness about the award and plan their next steps accordingly, and not the imposition of another procedural step. The District Court and the High Court fell into error that the limitation for filing objections was still running when the appellant filed an application under Section 17 of the Act on 10.11.2022. The formal date of notice of filing of the award on the respondents, that is, 18.11.2022 holds no significance as they were made suffic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant s husband was the sole proprietor of a firm M/S S.R. Engineering Construction, which had secured a work order bearing CA No. CWE/TEZ/8 in 1987-1988 from the respondents. The work order was governed by the general conditions of contract, of which Cl. 70 contained an arbitration clause. The agreement involved the firm constructing a permanent armament section at Tezpur. The firm completed the work and raised a bill for the same on 18.01.1993. However, as the respondents did not make the payment, the appellant was compelled to request for arbitration to resolve the dispute. The respondents declined and thus the appellant filed an application before the Delhi High Court seeking the appointment of an arbitrator which was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. Another application by the appellant before the Addl. District Judge, Delhi met the same fate, and it was only on 26.08.2019 that the appellant s application under Section 20 was allowed and an arbitrator was appointed by the District Judge, Sonitpur by an order in T.S. (Arb.) Case No. 19/2003. The appellant s husband passed away during the course of the arbitral proceedings and she came to represent him as his legal heir. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the formal notice of the award was received by the respondent and the application to pronounce judgment according to the award was filed only on 10.11.2022 when the limitation period of 30 days was still running at the said point of time. 10. Questioning the above referred order, the appellant filed a Civil Revision Petition No. 138/2022 under Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the High Court. By way of the impugned order impugned before us, the High Court dismissed the revision and upheld the District Court s order. The High Court also held that the application for pronouncing the judgment according to the Award was filed during the subsistence of the period for objections by treating 18.11.2022 as the date as notice of filing the award . It referred to the text of Sections 14 and 17 of the 1940 Act as well as Article 119 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 to hold that only a formal notice issued by a court will satisfy the requirement of Section 14(2). 11. Submissions: We have heard the submissions of the counsels for both the parties. Ms. Madhusmita Bora, counsel for the appellant submitted that when the District Judge decided the application under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry specific in its requirements, and if any other legal event is taken to be sufficient compliance with the provision, its text will be rendered otiose. 12.1 It was further submitted that the intention of Section 14(2) is to enable the award-debtor to apprise himself of the award s contents, so as to file any objections effectively. Hence, the intent of the provision cannot be ignored and mere communication about the existence of the award cannot be a compliance with the provision. In any case, even if the order dated 21.09.2022 is to be considered, it merely states that the respondents are required to clear the balance fees of the arbitrator, following which the award may be published. That is, the order itself envisages that the payment of fees per se shall not satisfy the requirements of Section 14(2), and the court has to take the legal step of notifying the parties of its filing. Accordingly, a formal notice was issued by the court on 18.11.2022, confirming the argument advanced. Further, he argued that if the appellant s interpretation is allowed, the legal event which constitutes as notice of the filing of award will vary from case to case, which does not seem to the intenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in Court, and the Court shall thereupon give notice to the parties of the filing of the award. (3) Where the arbitrators or umpire state a special case under clause (b) of section 13, the Court, after giving notice to the parties and hearing them, shall pronounce its opinion thereon and such opinion shall be added to, and shall form part of, the award. 17. Judgment in terms of award.- Where the Court sees no cause to remit the award or any of the matters referred to arbitration for reconsideration or to set aside the award, the Court shall, after the time for making an application to set aside the award has expired, or such application having been made, after refusing it, proceed to pronounce judgment according to the award, and upon the judgment so pronounced a decree shall follow, and no appeal shall lie from such decree except on the ground that it is in excess of, or not otherwise in accordance with the award. ( emphasis supplied ) 15. From a plain reading of the provisions, it appears that the parties need to be notified of the filing of award. While Art. 119(b) of the Limitation Act requires that there be a service of notice for the limitation to start running, Section 14( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annot disturb rights accrued in law. This is squarely applicable to the case before us, wherein the order dated 21.09.2022 precisely laid out that the award is available, and the only formality withholding the respondent s access to it is clearance of the arbitrator s fees. While a formal notice of filing of the award was only issued on 18.11.2022, applying this decision to the facts this case, it does not take away from the fact that the respondents were well aware of the award s filing on 21.09.2022 itself. Similarly, the decision in Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. v. Raunaq and Co. (P) Ltd. (1988) 4 SCC 31 clarifies that the only objective of Section 14(2) is that the parties are aware of the award s existence and suggests that this a substantive compliance. If this were to be a procedural stipulation, the party intending to file objections can insist of technicalities like the mode of notice, and use those unfairly to gain time. 18. As far as the respondents contention of taking the date of receiving the copy of the award is concerned, it is taken to be an impermissible departure from Section 14(2) s text. This Court in Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v C.K. Ahuja 1995 Supp (1) SCC 744 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
