UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus M/S DEEPAK ELECTRIC & TRADING COMPANY & ANR.

Citation: [2011] 12 S.C.R. 1198 · Decided: 20-10-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2011] 12 S.C.R. 1198 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
v. 
M/S DEEPAK ELECTRIC & TRADING COMPANY & ANR. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1734 of 2006) 
OCTOBER 20, 2011. 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] 
Liml1ation Act, 1963 - Article 119(b) of the Schedule -
Period of limitation for filing applications under the Arbitration 
C . Act, 1940 for setting aside an arbitral award - Starting point 
of - Held: An application for setting aside an award has to bf' 
filed within 30 days from "the date of service of the notice of 
the filing of the award" - The starting point of limitation is the 
date of service of the notice of the filing of the award and not 
D the date of knowledge of the filing of the award - Arbitration 
Act, 1940. 
The appellants and respondent No.1 had entered into 
a contract for construction of a Complex. The contract 
E contained an arbitration clause. As disputes arose 
between the parties, respondent No.1 invoked the 
arbitration clause and an arbitrator was appointed. The 
arbitrator published his award whereupon the 
respondents filed a petition in the High Court under 
Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for filing 
F · the award and for making the award a rule of the court 
and for passing a decree in terms of the award. After the 
award was filed, notice of the filing of the award was 
directed to be issued to the parties. Notice was served 
on the Union of India, but notice could not be served on 
G the Executive Engineer, C.P.W.D. A letter was addressed 
by the Executive Engineer to the Registrar of the High 
Court saying that he had not received a formal notice 
from the court. Fresh notice was again directed to be 
issued to the Executive Engineer. While service of notice 
H 
1198 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. DEEPAK ELECTRIC & 1199 
TRADING COMPANY & ANR. 
on the Executive Engineer was awaited, Union of India 
A 
filed objections to the award of the arbitrator. 
Respondent No.1 contended that the objections filed 
by the Union of India to the award of the arbitrator were 
not within the period of limitation, i.e. 30 days from the 
8 
date of service of the notice of filing of the award. The 
appellants, on the other hand, contended that th.e 
Executive Engineer had not been served with the notice 
of filing of award and, therefore, limitation had not been 
begun to run. 
c 
The Single Judge of the High Court held that under 
Section 79 of CPC when suits are filed against the Central 
Government, only the Union of India has to be arrayed . 
as a party and the Executive Engineer by no stretch of 
imagination can be taken to be a party in such 0 
proceedings; that the objections of Union of India to the 
• award were time barred and accordingly made the award 
a rule of the court. 
I 
I 
Aggrieved, the appellants filed appeal before the 
E 
Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench 
held that as the counsel on behalf of the Executive 
Engineer had inspected the record of the case in the 
court on 21.05.1997, the Executive Engineer will be 
deemed to have acquired knowledge of the filing of the 
award on 21.05.1997 and the period of 30 days counted 
from 21.05.1997 had expired by the time objections were 
filed by the Union of India and the objections to the award 
were time barred. Accordingly, the Division Bench of the 
High Court dismissed the appeal of the appellants. 
F 
G 
The question which arose for consideration in the 
present appeal was whether the Division Bench of the 
High Court took a correct view in the impugned order 
that the objections to the award were time barred. 
H 
1200 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 12 S.C.R 
A 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1.1. Article 119 of the Schedule to the 
Limitation Act, 1963, prescribes the period of limitation for 
filing applications under the Arbitration Act, 1940. It is 
clear from clause (b) of Article 119 of the Schedule to the 
8 
Limitation Act, 1963 that an application for setting aside 
of an award has to be filed within 30 days from "the date 
of service of the notice of the filing of the award". Thus, 
the starting point of limitation is the date of service of the 
notice of the filing of the award and not the date of 
C knowledge of the filing of the award. [Para 6] [1203-F-G] 
Deo Narain Choudhury vs. Shree Narain Choudhaury 
[(2008) 8 sec 626] - relied on. 
Union of India vs. Surinder Kumar [61 (1996) DLT 42 
D (0.8.)] - referred to. 
1.2. The Division Bench of the High Court was not 
right in coming to the con
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.