Tez Kaur vs Union Of India And Others on 16 September, 2013

[Cites 1, Cited by 8]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tez Kaur vs Union Of India And Others on 16 September, 2013

Bench: K. Kannan

            Civil Revision No.4828 of 2012                              1



                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                           AT CHANDIGARH

                                                Civil Revision No.4828 of 2012
                                                Date of decision:16.09.2013

            Tez Kaur                                              ....Petitioner
                                                Versus

            Union of India and others                             ....Respondents

            CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

            Present:- Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate
                      for the petitioner.

                               Mr. K.K.Kahlon, Senior Panel Counsel
                               for respondents No.1 and 2.

                               Mr. R.S.Madan, Advocate
                               for respondent- National Highway Authority.


            K. KANNAN, J (ORAL)

Revision petition is against order rejecting the application for setting aside the arbitration award. The award was passed on 28.1.2009 and the application has been filed on 2.5.2009. The contention of the petitioner was that he had no knowledge of the award and filed the petition for setting aside the award within three months from the date of knowledge of the award. The Court has observed that as per the petitioner the cause for delay in filing the application were vague with regard to her knowledge. There are no more than two ways in such type of applications either party had knowledge of the award or she did not. If the petitioner had no knowledge of the award, the only way by which the Union of India Kadian Savita 2013.09.18 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Civil Revision No.4828 of 2012 2 could have proved otherwise by showing that the petitioner had actually been served with the award or that she knew about it more than 3 months prior to the date when she filed the petition. No such attempt was made. Counsel for the Union of India states that Arbitration Act is a special enactment that contains inherent procedure for disposing of petition which is beyond time stipulated under the Act. The Act provides for 3 months and it must be taken that the period of limitation was not from date of communication of the order but from the date of order.

In this case, plaintiff's averment regarding her knowledge was not shown to be wrong or false. The date of the award as the starting period of limitation must always be taken as date of knowledge of the award. There existed no delay and the Court was bound to entertain the petition and proceed to dispose of the case in accordance with law.

The impugned order is set aside. The petition is ordered to be taken on file and the matter be disposed of in accordance with law.

Revision petition is allowed.

            September 16, 2013                                   (K. KANNAN)
            savita                                                 JUDGE




Kadian Savita
2013.09.18 15:48
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court Chandigarh

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court