M.P. HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BOARD & ANR. versus K.P. DWIVEDI

Citation: [2021] 11 S.C.R. 1083 · Decided: 03-12-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1083
[2021] 11 S.C.R. 1083
1083
M.P. HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
BOARD & ANR.
v.
K.P. DWIVEDI
(Civil Appeal No. 6768 of 2021)
DECEMBER 03, 2021
[M. R. SHAH AND B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran, 1983 – ss. 7 and
19 – Reference Petition and Revision Petition – Contract for
construction of houses was executed between appellants and
respondents – Dispute arose between the parties as regard to
extension of time for completion of work – Appellant rescinded the
contract – Respondent filed writ petition before the High Court –
The High Court by order dated with consensus of both the parties
appointed an arbitrator i.e. Housing Commissioner – The Arbitrator
passed an award dated 07.11.2008 rejecting the claim of the
respondent and granted relief to the appellant – Instead of
challenging the said award u/s. 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, the respondent filed fresh reference petition
before M.P. Arbitration Tribunal u/s. 7 of the 1983 Act – M.P.
Arbitration Tribunal by order dated 27.02.2017 dismissed the claim
of the respondent as not maintainable since the claim was already
decided by the Arbitrator and the award had achieved finality –
Respondent then filed Arbitration Revision Petition before the High
Court u/s. 19 of the 1983 Act, which was allowed by the High Court
and Tribunal was directed to decide the reference/claim in
accordance with law – On appeal, held: The order passed by the
High Court referring dispute to the Arbitrator was a consent order
– The respondent-contractor participated in the arbitration
proceedings by submitting claim is binding on the parties by ‘issue
estoppel’ – The award passed by the Arbitrator was not challenged
and it has attained finality – As per s.19 of the 1983 Act, revision
application is maintainable only against the award passed by the
Arbitral Tribunal – In the instant case, the Arbitral Tribunal had
not passed any award – Even the High Court had not set aside the
award passed by the arbitrator – Technically, award passed by the
arbitrator stands – It is binding between the parties – Thus, the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1084
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 11 S.C.R.
impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in the
Arbitration Revision petition is quashed and order passed by the
Arbitral Tribunal dated 27.02.2017 is restored.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The case of the respondent – contractor that the
earlier order passed by the High Court dated 20.08.2008 passed
in Writ Petition No.9131 of 2008, referring the dispute between
the parties for adjudication to the Arbitrator – Housing
Commissioner and thereafter the award declared by the Arbitrator
– Housing Commissioner dated 07.11.2008 are non-est and void
and therefore, it was open for the contractor to file a fresh
reference petition before the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 7
of the 1983 Act, cannot be accepted for the following reasons: (i)
It was the respondent – contractor who approached the High
Court by filing Writ Petition No.9131 of 2008 submitting that he
has invoked the arbitration clause; (ii) The order passed by the
High Court dated 20.08.2008 passed in Writ Petition No.9131 of
2008 referring the dispute between the parties to the Arbitrator
– Housing Commissioner was a consent order; (iii) Thereafter
the respondent – contractor submitted the claims before the
learned Arbitrator – Housing Commissioner; (iv) The learned
Arbitrator – Housing Commissioner passed an award which has
attained the finality; (v) That the review petition filed by the
contractor for clarification of the order dated 20.08.2008 passed
in Writ Petition No.9131 of 2008 to clarify the aforesaid order to
the extent that it did not take away the right of the contractor to
file the reference petition before the Arbitral Tribunal under the
1983 Act came to be rejected and the same also attained finality;
(vi) The claims submitted before the Arbitrator – Housing
Commissioner; before the High Court in Writ Petition No.9131
of 2008; and the claim submitted in Reference Petition before
the Arbitral Tribunal under the 1983 Act are the same without
any change; (vii) In the subsequent reference petition before the
Arbitral Tribunal under the 1983 Act there was no reference to
the earlier order passed by the High Court in Writ Petition
No.9131 of 2008 referring the dispute between the parties for
adjudication to Arbitrator – Housing Commissioner and the award
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1085
pass

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.