Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. Before the High Court it was urged on behalf of the appellants that new pleas taken by Respondent 1 in the amendment application were wrongly entertained inasmuch as an objection to the award could not be raised after the expiry of 30 days from the date of service of notice under Section 14. It was submitted that even prior to his attaining majority Respondent 1 was aware of the arbitration proceedings inasmuch as on 13-1-1972 his presence is noted in proceedings taken by the Commissioner appointed by the court and that Respondent 1 had also received copy of paper No. Kha-23/24 on 21-5-1967. The High Court has found that Respondent 1 did have knowledge of the proceedings even during minority and also had constructive notice of the filing of the award after the same was filed and that if no objection had been filed by Respondent 14 within 30 days Respondent 1 could have been precluded from filing new objections on 24-3-1975 due to bar of limitation. The High Court has however observed that the appellants are estopped from challenging the amendments after having accepted costs allowed to them. The High Court has also held that all the pleas that were canvassed on behalf of Respondents 1 to 3 herein were basically taken in the objections that were filed by Respondent 14 and that paragraphs 46 to 60 which were added by Respondent 1 by way of amendment application contain merely better particulars of what had already been pleaded in the original objections.