KRISHNA DEVI @ SABITRI DEVI (RANI) M/S S.R. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

KRISHNA DEVI @ SABITRI DEVI (RANI) M/S S.R. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The court held that for the purpose of Article 119(b) read with Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, limitation for filing objections to an award begins when the party becomes aware of the filing of the award (i.e. comes to know of its existence and accessibility), not necessarily when a formal court notice is served; applying this, the respondents were aware by 21.09.2022 (order directing payment of arbitrator's fees), so the thirty-day limitation expired on 20.10.2022 and the appellant's Section 17 application filed on 10.11.2022 was valid; the High Court order was set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Krishna Devi @ Sabitri Devi (Rani) M/s S.R. Engineering Construction; Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 27.03.2024 set aside.
Legal Topics
Section 17, Arbitration Act, 1940, Section 14(2), Article 119(b), First Schedule, Limitation Act, 1963, Notice of Filing of Award, Judgment in Terms of Award, Time for Filing Objections to Arbitral Award
Arbitration Limitation Civil Procedure Section 17, Arbitration Act, 1940 Section 14(2), Arbitration Act, 1940 Article 119(b), First Schedule, Limitation Act, 1963 Notice of Filing of Award Judgment in Terms of Award +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Krishna Devi @ Sabitri Devi (Rani) M/s S.R. Engineering Construction

Appellant

Union of India & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the limitation period for filing objections under Article 119(b) begins on formal service of notice of filing of the award or when a party becomes aware of the existence/filing of the award
  2. 2 Whether Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 requires formal written notice for the limitation to start running or whether informal notice/awareness suffices
  3. 3 Whether the District Court and High Court erred in treating 18.11.2022 (formal notice) as start of limitation instead of 21.09.2022 (order directing payment of arbitrator's fees)

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that for the purpose of Article 119(b) read with Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, limitation for filing objections to an award begins when the party becomes aware of the filing of the award (i.e. comes to know of its existence and accessibility), not necessarily when a formal court notice is served; applying this, the respondents were aware by 21.09.2022 (order directing payment of arbitrator's fees), so the thirty-day limitation expired on 20.10.2022 and the appellant's Section 17 application filed on 10.11.2022 was valid; the High Court order was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 27.03.2024 set aside.

Orders

  • Order dated 27.03.2024 in Civil Revision Petition No. 138/2022 (Gauhati High Court) set aside
  • District Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur directed to take up and dispose of Misc. (J) No. 61/2022 expeditiously, preferably within five months from date of receipt of this judgment