Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Punjab State Civil Supplies ... vs M/S Laxmi Rice Mills/Traders And Others on 15 February, 2012

Author: L.N. Mittal

Bench: L.N. Mittal

F.A. O. No. 3071 of 2010 (O&M)                                 -1-




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH




                         F.A. O. No. 3071 of 2010 (O&M)
                         Date of decision : February 15, 2012


Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and another


                                            ....Appellants
                         versus
M/s Laxmi Rice Mills/Traders and others
                                            ....Respondents


Coram:       Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal


Present :    Mr. CS Bakshi, Advocate, for the appellants

             Mr. Ashok Jindal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 5


L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)

CM No. 14925.CII of 2010 This is application for condonation of delay of 119 days in filing the appeal.

Heard.

For reasons mentioned in the application which is accompanied by affidavit of the counsel, the application is allowed and delay of 119 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

F.A. O. No. 3071 of 2010 (O&M) -2-

FAO No. 3071 of 2010

Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and its District Manager have filed the instant first appeal assailing judgment dated 4.6.2009 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sangrur thereby dismissing objections filed by appellants and also objections filed by respondents no. 1 to 5 under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against award Annexure P/1 passed by respondent no. 6 - Arbitrator.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

The Arbitrator relying on instructions dated 6.4.1995 of the appellants allowed claim of the Miller for driage shortage. Counsel for the appellant contended that in view of instructions dated 6.6.2000, no such claim could be allowed to the Miller. The contention cannot be accepted because the dispute relates to milling season 1994-95 and therefore, subsequent instructions dated 6.6.2000 would not be applicable to the same. Consequently, there is no infirmity in the impugned award of Arbitrator on this count and objections preferred by appellants have been rightly dismissed.

There is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.




                                                       ( L.N. Mittal )
February 15, 2012                                           Judge
   'dalbir'