Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Union Of India vs M/S. Pal Construction Engineers ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 889 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 889 Bom
Judgement Date : 21 March, 2017

Bombay High Court
Union Of India vs M/S. Pal Construction Engineers ... on 21 March, 2017
Bench: R.M. Savant
                                                                            wpst-4647-17(916)


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                     WRIT PETITION St. NO. 4647 OF 2017 

Union of India                               )
through the Garrison                         )
Engineer (I) Ministry of                     )
Defence, Military Engineering                )
Service (P) Factory, Kirkee,                 )
Pune - 3                                     )                      ..Petitioner

     Vs.
M/s Pal Construction Engineers               )
& Contractors, having its                    )
address at G-23, Shanti Kunj                 )
Opposite GPO Pune -1                         )                      ..Respondent  



Ms S. I. Shah i/b S. I. Shah & Co. for the Petitioner
Mr. Ketan Joshi i/b Ergo Juris for the Respondent  


                                             CORAM :        R. M. SAVANT, J.
                                             DATE   :       21st MARCH, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT 


1               Rule with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties made 

returnable forthwith and heard.



2               The order dated 9-1-2017 passed by the Learned 10th Joint Civil 

Judge Senior Division, Pune is taken exception to by way of the above Petition.

By the said order, the application for condonation of delay in filing the

application for restoration came to be rejected.

mmj                                                                                           1 of 5



                                                                           wpst-4647-17(916)




3              It is not necessary to burden this order with unnecessary details. 

Suffice it would be to state that the Petitioner herein had filed an application

under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 for challenging

the Award dated 28-12-2002 passed by the sole Arbitrator in the arbitral

proceedings between the Petitioner and the Respondent. The said application

under Section 34 was filed in the Court of the Learned Civil Judge Senior

Division, Pune. It seems that the said application was transferred from one

court to another and ultimately came to be dismissed for non prosecution on

11-4-2014. The Petitioner thereafter filed the instant application being Misc

Application No.340 of 2015 for restoration, since the said Misc Application

was belated by about 319 days the Petitioner filed an application for

condonation of delay which was marked as Exhibit 1. The Petitioner set out

the reasons in the said application for condonation of the said delay. The sum

and substance of the case of the Petitioner is that there was a communication

gap between the Learned Government Pleader who was appearing for the

Petitioner in the said application filed under Section 34 as a consequence of

which the Petitioner was not aware of the dates when the application was

listed before the Trial Court, resulting in the dismissal of the application for

non prosecution. It was also the case of the Petitioner that the said application

was transferred from one court to another atleast on 5 occasions. The grounds

set out by the Petitioner did not commend acceptance to the Learned Joint

mmj 2 of 5

wpst-4647-17(916)

Civil Judge Senior Division. The Learned Joint Civil Judge Senior Division

held that no useful purpose would be served by condoning the delay as the

original application filed under Section 34 was filed before the wrong court as

it was required to be filed before the District Court and especially the Learned

Principal District Judge, Pune. As indicated above it is the said order dated 9-

1-2017 which is taken exception to by way of the above Petition.

4 What is required to be noted in the instant matter is that the

Learned 10th Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune, after holding that the

original Petition has been filed in the wrong court has proceeded to adjudicate

the matter i.e. application for condonation of delay on merits. This obviously

could not have been done by the Learned Judge having regard to the fact that

he had ruled that he did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the main

Application filed under Section 34 and thereby has held that he did not have

the jurisdiction to entertain the application for condonation of delay also.

Hence on the short ground that the application for condonation of delay has

been dealt with by the Court which did not have the jurisdiction, the

impugned order dated 9-1-2017 would have to be set aside and the application

would have to be relegated back to the proper court by granting permission to

the Petitioner to file the same or get it transferred to the proper court. Hence

the following directions :

mmj                                                                                              3 of 5



                                                                              wpst-4647-17(916)




(i)     The impugned order dated 91-2017 passed by the Learned 10th Joint 

Civil Judge Senior Division Pune, is quashed and set aside. Misc Application

No.340 of 2015 as also the application for condonation of delay is accordingly

restored to file.

(ii) The Petitioner may file an application for transfer of the Application

filed under Section 34 of the said Act as also the instant application being Misc

Application No. 340 of 2015 along with the application for condonation of

delay to the Court of the Learned Principal District Judge Pune.

(iii) The Learned Principal District Judge to hear and decide the application

for condonation of delay on its own merits and in accordance with law. It is

clarified that the contentions of the parties are kept open for being urged

before the said Court.

(iv) The execution proceeding i.e. Special Darkhast No.2148 of 2014 which

has been filed by the Respondent would not be proceeded with for a period of

4 weeks from date so as to enable the Petitioner to carry out the directions as

contained in clause (ii) above.



(v)     If the delay is condoned, the hearing of the Misc Application No.340 of 


mmj                                                                                            4 of 5



                                                                      wpst-4647-17(916)

2015 is expedited and in the event the same is allowed, the hearing of the

Application filed under Section 34 is also expedited.

5 The Petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is accordingly

made absolute with parties to bear their respective costs of the Petition. The

parties to act upon an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the

court shirestedar.

                                                              [R.M.SAVANT, J]




mmj                                                                                    5 of 5



 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter