Anand Kumar Jain vs Union Of India And Anr.
1987 Latest Caselaw 550 Del

JUDGMENT

B.N. Kirpal, J.

(1) The difficulty in the way of the petitioner, however, is that the petitioner, prior to his filing of the petition, had accepted the award. It is vehemently contended by learned counsel for the respondents that having accepted the award the petitioner cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time. The petitioner, it is submitted, cannot be permitted to challenge the award, the benefits of which have already been taken by the petitioner.

(2) If the award bad not been accepted by the respondent, it was at liberty to challenge that part of the award which was in favor of the petitioner. By the letter of 30th August, 1985, the respondent therefore, offered to the petitioner that it would accept the award, provided the petitioner did likewise.

(3) It is true that the financial circumstances of the petitioner may have been such that he was compelled to accept the award and give a No Claims Certificate, but once he did so, I am afraid, he cannot be permitted to challenge the award. As already indicated hereinabove, the respondent No. I bad offered to accept the award only if the petitioner did likewise. As I have observed, if the respondent had not accepted the award and if the petitioner had not acted upon the same, the respondent would have been at liberty to file objections to the award. The respondent, it has been argued by Shri Khanna, was made to believe that with the submission of a No Claims Certificate the award had been accepted by both the parties and there would be no occasion for anyone to file any objection to the award. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that when the award was filed in Court and the notice of the filing of the award was issued, the Union of India did not file any objections because No Claims Certificate had been filed by the petitioner and the award had been accepted by both the parties. It appears to me that it would be very dangerous to allow any party to accept the award ; get the money from the other party, and then when notice of filing of the award is given, quietly file objections to the award. The opposite party, respondent No. I, in the present case, must have been given to believe that the award having been accepted by the petitioner, there would be no occasion to file any objections. There is lot of merit in the submission of Shri Khanna that it is for this reason that the Union of India did not file any objections.

(4) In my opinion, therefore, the petitioner having acquiesced to the award cannot be allowed to raise any objections in respect thereof. On this account alone, the objections filed by the petitioner are dismissed.

(5) For the reasons stated hereinabove, the award is made the rule of the Court and a decree in terms thereof is passed. There will, however, be no orders as to costs.