Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2007 (3) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (3) TMI 722 - SC - Companies LawWhether the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad was right in dismissing the application filed under section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 filed by M/s Chopra Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. ("the Developer") on the basis of Award dated 29.3.1994 given by the Arbitrator in the above court for want of jurisdiction? Whether application dated 12.4.1994 filed by the Developer in the trial court at Faridabad was maintainable? Held that:- Appeal dismissed. The Award is made the rule of the court by the trial court on 31.5.2006 in view of the impugned judgment of the High Court. We have also gone through the Award. We do not wish to express any opinion on the merits, however, the fact remains that the arbitrator entered upon the reference on 24.8.1992. He fixed the date of hearing on 5.9.1992. On 5.9.1992 the appellant appeared before him. The arbitrator was absent. The Award has been given almost after fourteen months and that too after 14.10.1993 when the appellant herein moved an application under section 20 of the Act for appointment of a new arbitrator. Taking into account the above circumstances, we set aside the ex parte Order dated 31.5.2006 passed by the trial court at Faridabad making Award dated 29.3.1994 the rule of the court. Consequently, we direct restoration of the matter to the file of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad in Case No. 7 instituted on 12.4.1994 titled M/s Chopra Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Jatinder Nath and anr. The trial court will re-examine the question on merits as to whether the Award given by the arbitrator on 29.3.1994 should or should not be made the rule of the court. The trial court will have to decide whether to extend the period for making the Award or not, whether to supercede the reference or not. The trial court will proceed in accordance with law. Any observation on the merits of the case mentioned herein above shall not be treated as opinion of this Court. Further, the trial court will proceed on the basis that it has territorial jurisdiction to decide the above matter. Appeal dismissed.
|