Delhi High Court
Decent Food Pvt. Ltd. vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi ... on 8 November, 2002
Author: S Mukherjee
Bench: S Mukerjee
JUDGMENT
S. Mukherjee, J.
IA No. 3133/2000
1. This application has preferred under Section
34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
seeking condensation of delay in filing the
objections.
2. The contention of the applicant is that
the objection petition was prepared on 1.4.2000 and
had been handed over to the representative, who
unfortunately got indisposed, leading to the delay
in actual lodging of the objection petition in this
Court, which could be achieved only on 17.4.2000.
3. For the reasons stated in the
application, and in view of the fact that only a few
days' delay is involved, the applicant is granted
the benefit of further period of 30 days as
envisaged by the Act. It is accordingly held that
the objections are within time, as per enlarged time
now allowed in terms of the present orders.
Application stands disposed of as allowed.
OMP No. 77/2000
4. Having gone through the Award, the objection
petition and the reply and rejoinder thereto, I find
that the Arbitrator has adopted one of the possible
views, by partly allowing the claims to the extent
of the supplies which have been found to be in
order, while in relation to the defective portion of
the supplies, the Arbitrator has directed 20%
penalty to be recoverable from the petitioner, and
has allowed the counter-claim of respondent to that
extent.
5. The Award is well reasoned and deals with
each and every contention of the parties. Following
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Aroson
Industries, I find that by way of objections under
the 1996 Act, it is not open to the
petitioner/objector to re-argue its contentions as in
review or appeal, or to seek from this Court a
different finding from the finding returned by the
Arbitrator.
6. Accordingly the objections are dismissed as
falling outside the scope of Section 43 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
7. There is a further grievance of the petitioner
to the effect that while the Award is dated 5th
January, 2000, yet the amount was paid only as late
as 31st March, 2000 in relation to Rs. 23 lakhs
thereof while further Rs. 4,57,000/- was paid even
later i.e. during the present proceedings. Learned
counsel for the petitioner presses for award of
interest from the date of the Award.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances
of the case, I consider it appropriate to grant to
the petitioner interest @ 18% from the date of the
Award and up to the date of payment.
9. As regards the interest for the period
prior to the Award is concerned, the Arbitrator is
deemed to have rejected the same since he did not
allow the specific interest claim of the petitioner
amounting to Rs. 15,83,315/- @ 15%, which had been
claimed.
10. Another submission of the petitioner is that
the Award question relating to the supplies for
the period 16.12.97 to 29.1.98, will be instead
actually utilised in elation to petitioner's
supplies for other periods not covered by the Award.
The apprehension is clearly misconceived and
misplaced.Since the dispute was referred in
relation to the said period from 16.12.97 to
29.1.98, and was also decided by the Award dated
5.1.2000 in relation to the same very period, the
recoveries there under cannot conceivably be related
to the supplies for any other period either before
16th December 1997 or after 29th January 1998.
11. In view of the above the objection petition
(OMP No. 77/2001) is dismissed. The result of the
dismissal of the objections would be, that the Award
dated 5.1.2000 shall be enforceable as a decree.
The petitioner will also be entitled to the interest
@ 18% per annum from the date of the Award and up to
the date of payment in relation to those amounts as
have been awarded in its favor. Equally the
respondents will be entitled to interest on the
counter claim amount from the date of the Award till
the date of realisation/recovery, also at 18% per
annum. There will be, however, no order as to
costs.
12. OMP 77/2000 is dismissed but parties to bear
their own costs.
