EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. versus AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD. versus AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Notice under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 need not be in writing and can be oral. As notice to counsel is notice to the party, the court's order noted by counsel satisfies the statutory requirement. The Allahabad High Court erred in setting aside the award for non-service of notice.

Parties
Appellant: East India Hotels Ltd.; Respondent: Agra Development Authority
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No. 106 of 1999
Outcome
Appeals allowed; award made rule of court reinstated
Legal Topics
Notice Under Section 14(2) Arbitration Act, 1940, Service of Notice, Filing of Arbitration Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

East India Hotels Ltd.

Appellant

Agra Development Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No. 106 of 1999

  1. 1 Whether notice under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 must be in writing
  2. 2 Whether intimation of filing of the award to counsel constitutes valid notice
  3. 3 At what stage is notice required under Section 14(2)

Ratio Decidendi

Notice under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 need not be in writing and can be oral. As notice to counsel is notice to the party, the court's order noted by counsel satisfies the statutory requirement. The Allahabad High Court erred in setting aside the award for non-service of notice.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; award made rule of court reinstated

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of Allahabad High Court set aside
  • Order of Additional Civil Judge, Agra dated 25.02.1999 making the award a rule of court affirmed