Patna High Court
Raghunandan Prasad vs Ajodhya Prasad on 25 March, 1982
Equivalent citations: AIR1982PAT212, 1982(30)BLJR392, AIR 1982 PATNA 212, 1982 BLJR 392, (1982) PAT LJR 48, 1982 BBCJ 296, (1982) BLJ 326
ORDER B.P. Jha, J.
1. This matter arises out of an order dated 21st February, 1981. By this order, the court below refused to grant an injunction to the petitioner.
2. The applicant filed an application on 24th September, 1980, for directing the arbitrators to file an award in the court. The court below is of opinion that such an application will fall under Article 119 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act"). It is relevant to quote Article 119 of the Act which runs as follows:
"119. Under the Arbitration Act, 1940 (10 of 1940).
(a) For the filing in the court of an award;
Thirty days The date of service of the notice of the making of the award;
(b) For setting aside and award or getting and award remitted for reconsideration.
Thirty days The date of service of the notice of the filing of the award.
3. In my opinion, the filing of such an application will not come within the purview of Article 119 of the Act. Article 119 (a) of the Act will apply to a case where an objection is filed to the award. If an award is filed, the court will serve a notice in respect of the filing of the award in the court. In that case, a period of thirty days is provided for filing an objection to the award from the date of the service of the notice of the making of the award. Such objection may be filed by the parties under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Therefore, this clause, namely, Article 119 (a), does not apply to the petition for a direction to the Arbitrators to file an award. Limitation under Article 119 (b) of the Act applies to a case for setting aside an award. Therefore, both the provisions occurring in Articles 119 (a) and 119 (b) of the Act will apply to objectors to file objection within a period of thirty days from the date of the service of the notice of the making or filing of the award. Therefore, the petition filed by the applicant for directing the arbitrators to file the award will not fall within the purview of Article 119 of the Act. Therefore, the court below erred in holding that it is barred under Article 119 of the Act I, therefore, set aside the order passed by the court below, as it is without jurisdiction, and remand the matter for a fresh hearing in accordance with law and to proceed in accordance with law for making the award as a rule of the court.
4. In the result, this application is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the court below is directed to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of the materials on record.