RSG Shares and Stocks Brokers Ltd. v. Neelima Goel

1. This appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 impugns the order of the court below dated 31.3.2012 which has accepted the objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and set aside the Award dated 30.4.2003.

2. Before objections are considered on merits, it is necessary that objections have to be filed within 90 days or at best after seeking condonation of delay of another 30 days i.e within a total peirod of 120 days. In this case, the Award has been passed on 30.4.2003 and objections at the very best were first filed in 2006 when the petition was filed in this Court but was thereafter returned as this Court did not have pecuniary jurisdiction. 2014:DHC:1565 The petition was thereafter filed after returning of this petition by this Court in the court of correct pecuniary jurisdiction as per liberty granted by this Court.

3. The issue therefore is that even if the objections are filed as in 2006, whether the objections are within limitation. Objections can be within limitation if the objector/respondent had not received copy of the Award from the arbitrator and objections are filed from the date of deriving knowledge of passing of the Award. If however, copy of the Award has been received by the respondent from the arbitrator, then, in such a case objections had to be filed maximum within 120 days of receiving of the copy of the Award. The impugned order of the court below does not show any application of mind on this aspect by reference to the arbitration record as to whether or not respondent ever received the copy of the Award. It is only if the respondent had not received the copy of the Award as sent by the arbitrator immediately after passing of the Award on 30.4.2003, then, the objections would be within time because objections will have to be filed within 120 days of the date of knowledge, assuming that no signed copy of the Award is required and/or received by the respondent.

4. In view of the fact that the order of the court below does not refer to these aspects as to how the objections filed by the respondent under Section 34 are within limitation, it is agreed that the impugned order is set aside and the court hearing objections under Section 34 will first examine the aspect as to whether objections filed by the respondent are within limitation. To determine this aspect, court will examine the arbitration record and if there is an extremely vexed question of fact, parties can also lead evidence on this aspect.

5. Only if, the objections are found to be within limitation, thereafter all aspects which are urged by the objector in the petition under Section 34, and the defences of the appellant with respect to such objections including of disentitlement to raise objections about arbitration agreement in view of Section 16 for the first time under Section 34, will be examined by the court below.

6. Nothing contained in this order is a reflection on merits of the case of either of the parties and which will be examined at the time of disposal of the objections under Section 34, if firstly the objections are found to have been filed within limitation.

7. The appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly subject to the aforesaid observations.

8. Parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge (West) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 2nd May, 2014, and the District & Sessions Judge will mark the objections filed under Section 34 for disposal in accordance with the observations made in the present order. Parties are left to bear their own costs.

MARCH 21, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. ib