Law:

Section:

Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----Ss.20, 30, 33 & 42---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Sched., Art. 178---Application for filing objections to award---Limitation---Service of notice on parties---Award by arbitrator was published by him in presence of parties and one copy each was delivered to parties on the very date award was made by him---Delivery of copy of award by arbitrator to parties would fulfill requirements of notice under S.42 of Arbitration Act, 1940 and in circumstances, it could not be said that arbitrator had not given notice of making of award to the parties---Limitation period prescribed under Art. 178 of Limitation Act, 1908 for filing objection to award would commence from the date of delivery of copy of award to the parties---Application challenging award filed after expiry of prescribed period of limitation computed from date of delivery of copy of award to parties, was rightly dismissed being barred by time. JUDGMENT On 3-2-1991, the petitioner filed an application in the Trial Court. It was stated therein that the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 are partners; that a dispute arose and the respondent No.2 was appointed as an Arbitrator vide an agreement dated 10-4-1988; that vide an award dated 6-6-1988 the respondent No. 2 directed the respondent No. 1 to pay a sum of Rs. 2,41,548 to the petitioner; that the respondent No.1 has not paid the said amount. He prayed that the said award be made rule of the Court and decree be passed. The respondent No. 1 in his written reply objected that the application is time­ barred. He also raised objections claiming that respondent No.2 has mis conducted himself of the proceedings; that the petitioner himself cancelled the said award and conceded that in fact it is the petitioner who owed the money to the respondent No. 1 and in fact, several amounts were paid after the award by respondent No. 1 to the petitioner while- leaving a balance of Rs.3,00,000 due to the respondent No. 1 from the petitioner. Issues were framed and evidence of the parties was being recorded when the respondent No. 1 filed an application requesting that the main application be rejected as being time-barred. A reply was…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492