III THE HIGH COURT BF KARKATAKA AT BAHGALORE
DATED THIS THE 11" DAY OF' JUICE, 2008
PRESENT
mm nozrnu: smmmcm v.G.sAnnu£§r , [: "
AND --
THE Honram mnausrncn V
mm 2€o.584~8I2007 1 A " '
%'l'WEE :
KALAYITHRA ENG1NEERING_'CO'NS'I'RU€3TIQN,'
REGISTERED PAr(1'm3RsH1P FIRM-._
REP. BY ITS MANAGENG PARTNER .A *
SRE K M JOSEPH HAvmG;n's " %
REGISTERED OFFECE AT 79, ':3'1fAGE
1NDIRANA{.§A_R-- A
BANGALQRI-gss. Q V. i;'1,'§'. AI'>PELmNT
(By Sri: K xvi JGiSEi;3H'V( )1: V )
AND :
1
THE: gH1Er»{C1v1L)
DEP'l'.>QFTELECOMMUNICATIONS
cro com=ouNn':s2A..1 BHAVAN ROAD
.» +BAN~GALoRE 1. ..... ., .
- ALSG AT 36 C.R.AVENUE
"3
Ac
' * » 'V §:ALc:ur:fI*.a.__ 12
: 'l.ir1~iE"'t_;v%p;1tiۤh:'"oF INDIA
A REP- BY. ITS SECRETARY
".T)E;P'I'.' are COMMUNICATIONS
N'EW~ DELHI
3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (civil;
amt. ow No.1 mo COMPLEX _2
No.1 swam VIVEKARANDA
ULSOOR "
BANGALORE 1.
(By 811': s «:2 MAHADEVAMUR'm--¥ _)
THIS MFA IS FILED 'UiAS'3'??(}}) 0?_'ARBiTRATIoN AND
CONCILIATION am', AGAIHM j' THE wJ_::~RDER DATED
21/6/06 PASSED' I__N A..'C"'rm}.9j96. 02%: {I'¥~IE FILE 0? VI
ADDL.C!'I'Y CI?a7fLg,iUD(}E,§ E'ANGAi;O5?E.-- cm (coca-3.1},
DISMISSING.-T§r{E5I.I?E7T3TI§)N....F'I§:«El3 U[S.30 AND 16 RIW.
SEC.33 OF? A123zfrRA*r1oNi;j vAL"'-I'.,,.--F(AR"' CHALLENGHIG THE
AWARD pggrezxg 2T:_«f:}Q,*1995. " 3
12:13 _M1F'1i\..;VcgmV:' {Eng .,5n-§os~ hes' nag' this day, SABHAHIT
J., '
appcfil"by.._.thc pefitrioner in AC..9/96 gs filed being
'by«..ihs.._oIdcr dated 21.6.2005 pamed by the VI
Sessions Judge, Baum": City (econ-
V -V 11) the petition flied under Sections 30 and 16
H A of the Arbiuanion Act (for short 'tbs Act') c
dated 27. 10.1995.
\;;=:,f~.
.. 3 ..
2. The essential facts of the case leading upto this
appeal with reference to the rank of the panics befon':"1f.he
trial court are as foliows:
An age-ement was entered into between M
herein and respondent for . of P u
quarters at Hebbal, Bangalore.
between the perm’ s, the mattee ” .. __ ‘tzcéitor ” L»
in View of the clause in refer” the djepute to
the schedule pmpertyfi zefened to
Sri. S.K.Ahuja so1e:’a_r_bit1jater* Vz.a:..j%£ni”.ezdj11dieate me
dispute of JOY. Arbitrator after
passed an award
on 27.13.95 to the mrdcs aad thereafter
filed the on 3.9.4.96. The appellant
heme; a§;V:p1i:j:Vat§son’V’u1;der Section 14(2) of the Act and
I6 I’/’W. 33 of the Act averting that
made by the appellant had been wrongly
Arbitrator and the saki clfixms.-mts may be
by} modifying the award passed by the Arbitrator and
‘éiaéi
.. 4 ..
the same was numbered as AC.No.9/96. Notice was issued
to the respondents in the said application No.AC 9/96. IN
the said applicatien, the respondents filazi objecfiona
contending that the application was barred by nine
an the craim made by the appellant befoxe the _
been considered and then: was no in the ‘4
The tria} court by oxtier dated
application filed by the appeflanjz “is L.
and on merits heki that the is aging éo for
* Cm “dad Rs. 1,4G,O00/- with inter:-,_s”t«.at till the date
we cow» ” ‘ ‘ ‘ %
Ovdarr
<:l+-34.11.03
.a{1i;rv\a,QaoQ~.;
P3 3’0 Hofikiv SW5′: who
of actual payment. Being by.v fiAie:V order, this
appeal is fiw court.
appeaxed -‘and the learned counsel
appearing
350 the contentions urged, the points
_eonsidemt11on axe:
Lee»
“1. Whether the finding of the trial
application filed by the appclhnt
is justificd or cafis for apptai? ‘
2. Whether the Iioiiing that
award passed by the set aside and
that the appe1l*a1ii:; of Rs.1,40,000/-
,wg?;;-;_”§%$¢«
3; Cm” deg’ with interest gt the date of payment
vide Coulrit V’ V ‘
Oreiasm.
01+: twnuos
M’ Q AL: 3.
Pa ka Hon’L€nsnss:§ .,
._ points m fixlw:
is justir”see1L%orT.¢=§~;z11s this appeal?
% :.%N§. 1%:i( The smmg of the ma court that the
by the appcfiant is barred by time is imble to
set asiée as the same iserxoneous.
V’ f5Point No.2: The finding of the trial court that the
_a;§pc23ant is entitled to award of Rs.£,40,000/– with inimest
30.9» 31+ 4:
* Co:a:sé>r¢f$é§{ at 13% pa flora an the date of paymt is fiahk to
VI; 9. Ch}!
dq*§J: bf: S61′. Sfiidfi.
1. x 1. 0% \§:.2″~
j.€~’¢m~aQw”
:92» in tuiov§U2n.sr\ss3
.. 5 _.
Point No.3: As per the final order 531′ the
I/W. 33 of the Act was filed by the xiii K V’
sand’ appficalfaon was ¢i1smzssed’ ‘ by:”g1d:’tjf’r’~da£cdj:V _’
However, on application filed f ‘ 21
was aiimved and
application was __of dehy. Being
and the matter
was consiicmfian of the
mmansi, on behaif of
the appellant was erxammed as
P’W.1 hé*g;§; to P69. 011 behaxr of the
and Ex:s.R1 and R2 were
court after considering the oontenfion
of the mateniai on zecord held that the
by the appellant herein was barmd by time
Viiwas not filed within thirty days from the date of maxing
\,/s
4’ Cioweoiecl
‘ VubkCou9cI
Oroler
C:-H:’:}lu|og
ctfixcndccflui
PE. ks eacrilsficswsu
-7-
notice regarding filing of the award in court and
that on mezits the appncatscc is entitled to A-
appellant woufid be entitled to an award for.VcR5;’i;§3{§;0SI§:{}/ ‘A V’
._
with interest at 18°14: p.a. 7′?
payment. However, since the ..ha£1ed L’
by time, the appIicati.on__was by
the said older dated in AC.9/96
has Prcfened this,3PP°a:1,c_ i V’
5. it am by
the xeith the notice of filing
the ._ the material on record would
show application under Section
14(2);df”t11e Act came in the court and according to
since was not served with the notice of
the court he could fik: application 011
i23.A8-E96 same is filed within thirty days fmm the
of of the film’ g of the award. The trial’ court
on the basis that the award was passed on
Lei»
_,,8___
25.1.95 and filed in the court on 9.4.96 and ”
was fibd in 2000 and penzod of t”
application to set aside the award f<j5i5:.
reconsideration is thirty dayQt__fti'9m the jdatet' of = L'
notice of filing of the is
barred by time. whenkmgsom £93' from the trial
court as to whethe: rcgaxding the
filing of the numbered as
AC.23/96 reported that no
notice herein in AC.23/96
t the court by the appefiant
and the appellant was numbered as
.- '. . . . . . .' _ -D. . I I in
ufshow that the award is filed in thc court on
was issued to the appellant herein and
"V}vheref£:1ft§;:. the finding of the trial court that the application
A tiipt been filed Within' t1mty' days nfimn the date of se:'Vx::e'
ofgnotice is erroneous as the same is not based upon the
' tlxatexial on record and the appeliant is not served with
Lksi
……]_1…..
8. The learned oounsél agpmring for the
has also submitted that the xnattsr may be _
trial court for consideration of the fine
merits, in accordance with law, w¢%az;mr
No.2.
9. POINT No.3: xngsw gr to points 1 and
2, we pass the foI}o\vingvoxd§’:If:V. ‘v V . ‘ V’ V
The appeal of the ma’ 1 court
that the AC9/96 is barred
by tiineiis that the application flied
by the app;11a;:t3u; {A’c.43/96) is msiaomd to the file
of v1A.Aa;11.<ii1y 'ciw£f: Judgé (cccrm 1), Banfilosc City. The
of that the appelmu is entiflcd to an
Iéé..T:I:;~;10,0o0/- with interest at 18% p.a. ftm
-A’ cn~wgg+~ea Eiifi till tkmdate ofpayment is set aside and the mum is
Vida, ‘L”:3uv’c. . . . .
” to the ma} court for consxderatzaon of the claun of
% o«+aw:%%%%%%%% é
Pgs, g~;”_Sfi to appear before the trial court on 8.7.2008 to stack
47 _ \’/§
‘appellant, in accordance with law. The parfies are
— 3.2 — .
further instxuctions. Let the lower court records in
and AC.23/96 shall be tins
forthwith, along with the copy’;;ar%%ft1a;s oxiier, V
