TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1600
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sh invited tenders for construction of a Gymnastic Hall in Eklavya Sports Stadium at Agra, pursuant to which the Respondent submitted its tender. The tender submitted by the Respondent being the lowest, the same was accepted. 3. A contract dated 22nd September 1998 was executed by and between the Superintending Engineer, Agra Firozabad Circle, Public Works Department, Agra representing the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Respondent, for construction of the Gymnastic Hall for consideration of Rs. 48,55,800/-. The construction was to be completed in twelve months' time. 4. The said contract dated 22nd September 1998 contained a clause for arbitration. Disputes and differences arose over claims raised by the Respondent on the Petitioner State of Uttar Pradesh, whereupon the Respondent invoked the arbitration clause. Shri N.L. Ganguly, a former Judge of Allahabad High Court was appointed Arbitrator. 5. The Respondent filed its Statement of Claim and the Petitioners filed their Counter Statement/Written Statement. The Written Statement was also permitted to be amended. The validity of the Arbitration Agreement, the arbitrability of the claims raised by the Respondent or the compet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioners filed an application Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Court of the District Judge, Agra, for setting aside the award. 11. The Court does not sit in appeal over the award of an Arbitral Tribunal. Nor does the Court re-assess or re-appreciate evidence Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The scope of interference with an award is limited. An award can only be challenged on grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. There was no such infirmity or patent illegality in the award, which called for interference of Court. The Petitioners failed to make out any of the grounds contained in Section 34(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for the setting aside of an arbitral award. 12. It is well settled that if any provision of a contract is capable of two interpretations, and the interpretation made by the Arbitrator is a possible interpretation, if not a plausible one, it cannot be said that the Arbitrator had acted outside his jurisdiction or that the view taken by him was against the terms of the contract. Similarly, evidence analysed by the Arbitral Tribunal cannot be re-analysed by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. 2 to this affidavit. 4. That the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, Public Works Department, Agra vide letter dated 05.07.2018 sent the proposal for filing First Appeal From Order before the Hon'ble Court to the Superintending Engineer, Agra circle, PWD, Agra, so that the necessary proceedings may be initiated in the matter. A true copy of letter dated 05.07.2018 of Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, Public Works Department Agra is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. 3 to this affidavit. 5. That thereafter the Superintending Engineer, Agra circle, PWD, Agra vide letter dated 05.07.2018 sent the said proposal and narrative of the case for filing First Appeal From Order to the Chief Engineer, Agra Region, Public Works Department, Agra and requested for necessary proceedings. A true copy of the letter dated 05.07.2018 of Superintending Engineer, Agra Circle, PWD, Agra is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No. 4 to this affidavit. 6. That it is relevant to mention here that the office of Engineer in Chief, Samanya varg, Public Works Department, Lucknow sent a letter dated 09.07.2018 to the Special Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as Annexure No. 8 to this affidavit. 10. That after receiving the permission the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, PWD, Agra wrote a letter on 05.04.2019 directing the deponent to approach the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. High Court Allahabad for filing appeal against the judgment and decree dated 26.04.2018 passed by the District Judge Agra Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in Arbitration Misc. Case No. 281 of 2010. (State of U.P. and Ors. v. M/s. Satish Chand Shivhare and Brothers) may be filed before the Hon'ble Court. 11. That after receiving the permission and after collecting all relevant material the deponent approached the office of Chief Standing Counsel, High Court, Allahabad on 08.04.2019 and the file was allotted to the standing Counsel who after perusing the entire record dictated the First Appeal From Order and the same is being filed without any further delay. It is, therefore, expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to condone the delay in filing the present writ petition and treat the same as filed well within time. 16. The High Court found that limitation had st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vice to cover an ulterior purpose. (See Manindra Land and Building Corpn. Ltd. v. Bhutnath Banerjee AIR 1964 SC 1336, Mata Din v. A. Narayanan (1969) 2 SCC 770 : AIR 1970 SC 1953, Parimal v. Veena (2011) 3 SCC 545 : (2011) 2 SCC (Civ) 1 : AIR 2011 SC 1150 and Maniben Devraj Shah v. Municipal Corpn. of Brihan Mumbai (2012) 5 SCC 157 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 24 : AIR 2012 SC 1629.) *** *** *** 11. The expression "sufficient cause" should be given a liberal interpretation to ensure that substantial justice is done, but only so long as negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides cannot be imputed to the party concerned, whether or not sufficient cause has been furnished, can be decided on the facts of a particular case and no straitjacket formula is possible. (Vide Madanlal v. Shyamlal (2002) 1 SCC 535 : AIR 2002 SC 100 and Ram Nath Sao v. Gobardhan Sao (2002) 3 SCC 195 : AIR 2002 SC 1201.) 12. It is a settled legal proposition that law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes. The court has no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds. "A result flowing from a statutory provisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppermost in the minds of the framers of the 1996 Act, and which has been strengthened from time to time by amendments made thereto. The present delay being beyond 120 days is not liable, therefore, to be condoned. 6. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 20. The Petitioners have, in this Special Leave Petition, raised the following questions of law: A. Whether a good case on merits involving huge public money can be dismissed on the grounds of delay alone, without even discussing the merits of the entire case? B. Whether Court is not obliged, while exercising jurisdiction Under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to also consider/discuss the merits of the case? C. Whether procedural formalities (which are sine qua non in Government Departments) should not be given any due consideration while deciding the fate of rights and liabilities of the parties? D. Whether dismissing the Appeal of a Government body on delay does not amount to unjust enrichment of the Claimant as the merits of the case have not been discussed by the Appellate Court? 21. The questions of law purported to be raised in this Special Leave Petition are misconceived. The right of appeal is a statutory right, sub....