TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (3) TMI 1067
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of Allahabad passed in Civil Revision No.106 of 1999. The appellant filed an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short the 'Act') before Additional Civil Judge, Agra, which was allowed and the disputes between the parties were referred to arbitration. After the proceedings were concluded the Umpire filed the award before the court on 13.11.1998, which was made rule of the court by order dated 25.02.1999. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed a revision petition before the High Court, which was allowed by the order under challenge, on the ground that no notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act was served on the respondent. 3. To appreciate the contentions raised by the learned counsel for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., presence of parties was recorded and the next date was fixed on 14.01.1999 as on that date the case could not be taken up on account of strike by the lawyers. On 19.02.1999 parties were present in the court, arguments were heard and on 25.02.1999, the award was made rule of the court. 6. We have now to determine as to what amounts to service of notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act. 7. Dr. Singhvi, learned senior counsel has contended that notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 need not be in writing and what is essential is that notice or intimation or communication of filing of Award must be issued and communicated by the court to the parties. According to the learned counsel notice to the counsel representing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "14. (2) The arbitrators or umpire shall, at the request of any party of the arbitration agreement or any person claiming under such party or if so directed by the Court and upon payment of the fees and charges due in respect of the arbitration and award and of the costs and charges of filing the award, cause the award or a signed copy of together with any depositions and documents which may have been taken and proved before them, to be filed in Court, and the Court shall thereupon give notice to the parties of the filing of the award." 10. From a perusal of the above provision, shorn of unnecessary details, it is clear that notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act need not be in writing and that it can also be oral. What....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the service of the notice in the formal way of delivering the notice or tendering it to the party can arise in the case of a notice given orally. The communication of the information that an award has been filed is sufficient compliance with the requirements of sub-section (2) of Section 14 with respect to the giving of the notice to the parties concerned about the filing of the award. 'Notice' does not necessarily mean 'communication in writing'. 'Notice', according to the Oxford Concise Dictionary, means intimation, intelligence, warning' and has this meaning in expressions like 'give notice, have notice' and it also means 'formal intimation of something, or instructions to do something'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Umpire and directed that learned counsel for the parties be informed. This order was duly noted by the counsel for both the parties. In our opinion the essential requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 14 was duly complied with inasmuch as intimation of filing the award to the parties was communicated. As notice to the counsel is notice to the party, the above order dated 13.11.1998 together with the endorsement of the advocate on the proceeding sheet would amount to a proper and valid service of notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act. We have already mentioned that as per the direction of the court Umpire also filed the record. We, accordingly hold that order dated 13.11.1998 which was noted by the learned counsel, w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies of the filing of the award but also directed the Umpire to file the records which was duly complied with by the Umpire before the next date of hearing. After taking notice of filing of award no controversy was raised by the respondent regarding not filing of the records till the award was made rule of the court nor could it have raised such a controversy on the facts. In fact after filing of the application under Section 14 of the Act by the appellant, time was prayed for to file a reply on behalf of the respondent but no such reply was filed. In view of the above position, we are of the opinion that the contention of Mr. Dwivedi has no force and accordingly it is rejected. 16. Mr. Dwivedi has also pressed into service Rule 8 of the ....