APPEAL NOS 2107 1 1993
From the Judgment and Order dated 931992 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition Nos13587 13588 13926 of 1991 and LPA No II 8 of 1992
Dipankar Prasad Gupta Solicitor General NN Goswami and HK Puri for the Appellants
Ranjit Kumar Deepak Sibal Ms Binu Tamta and Tarun Aggarwal for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MOHAN J
Leave granted
All these appeals raise the identical issue as to the interpretation of the Regulations relating to Diploma in Homeopathic Course
Hence they are dealt with under one and the same judgment
We will refer to the facts of CWP No 1358791 which will be enough for appreciating the issues involved
The respondents joints the Homeopathic Medical College Chandigarh in the year 1987 to secure a diploma in Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery hereinafter referred to as DHMS 
The said course is of a duration of four years
It is divided into 3 12 years of academic study and six months of internship
The course of study their duration and the scheme of examination are regulated by the Homeopathy Diploma Course DHMS Regulations 1983 hereinafter called the Regulations 
These Regulations have been framed by the Central Council of Homeopathy under Section 20 of the Homeopathy Central Council Act 1973
Part VI of the Regulations deals with examination
Regulations 8 to 10 occurring in part VI are relevant for our purpose
Regulation 8 talks of first First DHMS examination
That examination has to be held at the end of 12 months of the Course
Regulation 9 deals with second DHMS examination to be held at the end of second year
Regulation 10deals with 3rd DHMS examination 112years subsequent to the passing of the second DHMS examination
The respondents appeared in the first year DHMS annual examination in 312 June 1988
Since they did not get required percentage of pass marks two or more subjects they had to re appear
They were permitted to join the 2nd year class after June 1988
Under the interim orders of the High Court made in CWPNo 4375101990 they appeared in the examination
The respondents simultaneously took their third chance for the first year DHMS examination and finallycleared all the papers
They also got re appeared in one or more subjects in the 2nd year DHMS examination and accordingly took supplementary examination in June 1990
They were declared pass  in that examination
The respondents joined the third year DHMS examination and completed the course of study
In view of that the Principal of the college in August 1991 recommended and forwarded their examination forms for the third year Examination to the appellant namely the Council of Homeopathic System of Medicines Punjab
The appellant declined to permit the respondents to take the examination since they had not completed one year course of study between passing the first DHMS examination and appearing in the second one hence they were not eligible to appear in the third year examination
In other words the examination has not been passed in accordance with the scheme prescribed under Regulations 8  9
It was under these circumstances the writ petitions came to be preferred before the High Court of Punjab  Haryana in CWP No 1358791 praying for a direction to permit them to take third year DHMS examination commencing from 39 1991
The writ petition came up before a Division Bench
By judgment dated 931992 allowing that writ petition on the reasoning that if the minimum course of study as provided by Regulations 9 and 10 if held to be mandatory such a provision would be liable to be struck down in view of the decision of the Court in CWP No 230788 Gurinder Pal Singh vs Punjabi University  Ors which in turn has followed Single Judge decision reported in Harinder Kaur Chandok Minor vs The Punjab School Education Board through its Secretory It is the correctness of this judgment which has been questioned in all these appeals
The learned Solicitor General took us through Regulations at length
Part II deals with course of study
Regulation 3 states that a Diploma Course in Homeopathy shall be spread over a period of four years
Those four years include six months compulsory internship after the passing of the final year diploma examination
When we look at Regulations 8 to 10 three concepts emerge from them 313 i Subjects ii Time ii Marks
The duration of the examination is first year 12 months Second Year 12 months and third year 18 months
Regulation 8 states that a candidate may be admitted to the first DHMS examination
Similarly Regulation 9 also states that a candidate shall be admitted to the second DHMS examination
Identical language is used under Regulation 10 for Third DHMS examination
The submission of the learned Solicitor General is admission to these examinations is entirely different from admission to a course 
With reference to admission to each of the examination First Second and Third year the respective Regulations 89  10 prescribe the eligibility
Unless and until that eligibility is possessed admission to an examination is impossible
The High Court has taken a view that since the duration of the Course is four years this Regulation must be so construed as to fit in within those four years
This is wrong
Regulation 11 talks of re admission to an examination
That Regulation has nothing to do with the eligibility prescribed under Regulation 8 to 10
In other words Regulation 11 cannot control the operation of these Regulations
Regulation 11 iv talks of supplementary examination
In that supplementary examination it is open to a candidate to pass in a subject or subjects in which he has failed
When he so passes Clause v of that Regulation states that he shall be declared to have passed at the examination as a whole
Even thereafter if he fails in the subject or subjects at the supplementary examination and he has to appear in the examination in the failed subject or subjects at the next annual examination Clause vi prescribes i Production of a certification ii In addition if he had put a necessary attendance a further course of study in the subject or subjects in which he had failed the minimum number of chances as per this clause are only four
If he fails to complete the subjects within these four chances he will have to prosecute a further course of study in all the subjects of all parts for one year in other words he has to start the course afresh and appear for examination in all the 314 subjects
Thus it will be clear that all these Regulations talk of re admission to an examination in Order to enable the failed Candidate to undergo supplementary and subsequent examinations
On completion of subject in any one of those examinations within the four chances he is declared to have passed the whole examination
On this count it is incorrect to hold that passing in the supplementary examination relates back to the original examination
A careful reading of Regulation 9 requires the satisfaction of the following conditions for appearing in the Second Year DHMS examination i The candidate had passed the First DHMS examination at the end of one year previously
This means there must be a gap of one year between the passing of First year examination and appearing in the Second year examination ii Subsequent to the passing of the examination must have attended the courses of instruction for a period of at least one year
Therefore a candidate who fails in the first year examination in a subject or subjects if he passes any supplementary examination cannot take the Second year examination at the next academic year
This is because one year duration had not elapsed between the passing of First year examination in the supplementary examination and taking the Second year examination
Worse is a case where a candidate passes the First Year examination at the third or fourth attempt
The High Court has gone wrong in its construction on Regulation 11 that if a candidate passes a supplementary examination the insistence of one year would require the candidate to wait for one more year
Therefore he would inevitably have to study for the next year course from the next academic session
No doubt the candidate who passes the supplementary examination will have to sit idle till the next academic session
That is his own making
On that score the attempted harmonious construction by the High Court cannot be supported
The learned Solicitor General finally submits that none of the Regulations indicate a carry forward scheme  of the subjects
On the contrary it is a case of detention every year
Accordingly he submits that the Civil Appeals deserve to be allowed
Mr Ranjit Kumar learned counsel in opposition to this would urge that the interpretation placed by the High court on Regulations 8 to 10 is collect
Otherwise no useful purpose would be served by conducting a supplementary examination
Equally four chances afforded to the candidate could be rendered nugatory if the interpretation as stated by the learned solicitor General is accepted
315 Regulation 11 has to be read along with Regulations 8 to 10
It is not correct to argue that Regulation 11 has nothing to do with admission to an examination
As a matter of fact declaration of result of supplementary examination of First DHMS examination was made on 31101989
The next annual examination was held in January 1990 within 2 12 months
The respondents passed the course of First and Second DHMS examinations
The result of Second Year DHMS supplementary examination was declared in January 1991
In view of such an inordinate delay in the conduct of examinations the appellant cannot contend that one year period must elapse between First and Second DHMS examinations and that the Regulations should have been strictly obeyed
The Regulations do not say that after First DHMS examination a student cannot study for Second DHMS course and sit for examination provisionally
The declaration of result for the Second DHMS course takes place only after he had cleared the First DHMS examination
As rightly held by the High Court the word supplementary 
denotes supplementing to or in continuation of the annual examination
Where  therefore provisional admission is given for the Second Year DHMS course the failure to complete he First DHMS examination should not be put against the respondent
If the Regulations are so literally interpreted that will lead to absurdity
It will run counter to the object of providing a supplementary examination
This interpretion is holding the field for a long time
This was the reason why in Jaininder Mohan and Others vs The council of Homeopathic System of MedicinePunjab 1992 1 ILR Punjab 159 the court took a view that passing in the supplementary examination will relate back to the date of annual examination
Otherwise as rightly pointed out by the High Court anamolous results would follow
In so far as the respondents have completed the examination equities must weigh in their favour as laid down by this Court in A Sudha vs University of Mysore and another   Chandigarh Administration  Orsv Manpreet Singh  Ors   Shirish Govind Prabhudesai vs State of Maharashtra The learned counsel also relies on Orissa Homeopathic Regulations and contends that carry forward is permitted in similar Homeopathic Regulations
In order to appreciate the respective contentions we have to analyse the relevant Regulations relating to the Diploma Course in Homeopathy as contained Homeopathy Diploma course DHMS Regulations 1983
These Regulations are statutory in character in so far as they have come to be framed in exercise of powers conferred under Clauses i  j  k of Section 33 and sub section 1 of Section 316 20 of Homeopathy Central Council Act
Under Section 20 the Central Council may prescribe the minimum standards of education in Homeopathy required for granting recognised medical qualifications by Universities Boards and Medical Institutions in India
Section 33 speaks of powers to make Regulations
The relevant clauses are i j  k
They are to the following effect i The courses and period of study of practical training to be undertaken the subjects of examination and the standards of proficiency therein to be obtained in any University Board or Medical institution for grant of recognised medical qualification jthe standards of staff equipment accommodation training and other facilities for education in Homeopathy kThe conduct of professional examinations qualifications of examiners and the conditions of admissions to such examinations Therefore the Central council constituted under Section 3 of the Act has power to make Regulations under Section 33 k regarding the conditions of admission to the examination
The very object of this Act is to prescribe minimum standards for admission duration of course of training details of curriculum and syllabus of study and the title of degree or diploma
Since they very from State to State and even from Institute to Institute within a same State it had become necessary to constitute a Central Council
The Advisory Committee prescribed a course of four years
Accordingly in Regulation 3i it is provided that a Diploma Course in Homeopathy shall comprise a course of study spread over a period of four years
This includes the compulsory internship of six months duration after passing the final Diploma examination The Regulations contain eligibility to admission the curriculum the syllabus etcin the various parts
Part VI deals with examination
Regulation 8 talks of First DHMS examination
It is stated in clause i  A candidate may be admitted to the First DHMS examination provided that he has regularly attended the following course of instruction theoretical and practical for a period of not less than 12 months at a Homeopathy College to the satisfaction of the head of the college
317 From the above it is clear for admission to the First DHMS examination ia student must have regularly attended the courses of instruction theoretical and practical ii for a period of not less than 12 months iii to the satisfaction of the head of the College
As regards the Second DHMS examination Regulation 9 takes care
That states in Clause i  No candidate shall be admitted to the Second DHMS examination unless a he has passed First DHMS examination at the end of one year previously and b he has regularly attended the following courses of instruction both theoretical and practical in the subjects of examination for a period of at least one year subsequent to his passing First DHMS examination from a recognised Homeopathic College to the satisfaction of the head of the college
 Here again eligibility for admission to Second DHMS examination is based on two conditions i A student has passed his First DHMS examination at the end of one year previously
This means one year must elapse between the passing of the First year examination and taking of Second Year Examination
ii Subsequent to the passing the First year a he must have regularly attended the courses both theoretical and practical b for a period of at least one year c to the satisfaction of the head of the College
Thus unless and until these two conditions are satisfied a student is 318 ineligible for admission to the Second DHMS examination
Clause iii states that the Second DHMS examination shall be held at the end of two years of DHMS course
The Third DHMS course is provided for under Regulation 10
That reads as follows No candidate shall be admitted to the Third DHMS examination unless a he has passed the second DHMS examination at the end of 1 12 years previously and b has regularly attended the following courses of instructions both theoretical and practical in subjects of examination for a period of at least 112 years subsequent to his passing the Second DHMS examination in a recognised Homeopathic College to the satisfaction of the head of the College
 Here again the conditions for eligibility for admission to Third DHms examination are i After passing the Second DHMS examinationone and a half years must have elapsed before taking the Third DHMS examination
ii Subsequent to the passing of the Second DHMS examination a he must have regularly attended the courses both theoretical and practical b for a period of 112 years c to the satisfaction of the college
Thus it will be clear that the pattern of the examination is as rightly urged by the learned Solicitor General  12 months for First DHMS examination 12 months for Second DHMS examination and 18 months for Third DHMS examination
These put together with six months of compulsory internship make up the four years prescribed for the Course in Regulation 3
One thing that carefully requires to be noticed is that all the three Regulations 319 8 to 10 speak of admission to an examination First Second and Third year respectively
This is entirely different from admission to a course we find great force in this submission of the learned Solicitor General
The course of study may consist of four years but that has nothing to do with the scheme of examination
Now we come to Regulation 11
That requires to be reproduced in full i Every candidate for admission to an examination shall send to the authority concerned his application in the prescribed form with the examination fee at least 21 days before the date fixed for the commencement of the examination
iiAs soon as possible after the examination the examining body shall publish a list of successful candidates arranged in the following manner athe names and roll numbers of the first ten candidates in order of merit and b the roll number of others arranged serially
iiiEvery candidate shall on passing the examination receive a certificate in the form prescribed by the examining body concerned
iv A candidate who appears at the examination but fails to pass in a subject or subjects may be admitted to supplementary examination in the subject or subjects of that part of the examination in which he has failed to be held ordinarily after six weeks from the publication of result of the first examination on payment of the prescribed fee along with an application in the prescribed form
v If a candidate obtains pass marks in the subject or subjects at the supplementary examination or the subsequent examination he shall be declared to have passed at the examination as a whole vi If such a candidate fails to pass in the subject or subjects at the supplementary examination in the subject or subjects concerned he may appear in that subject or subjects at the next annual examination on production of a certification in addition to the certificate required under the regulations to the effect that he had attended to the satisfaction of the Principlea further course of study for a period 320 of next academic year in the subject or subjects in which he had failed provided that all the parts of the examination shall be completed within four chances including the supplementary one to be counted from the date when the complete examination becomes due for the first time
viiIf a candidate fails to pass in all the subjects within the prescribed four chances he shall be required to prosecute a further course of study in all the subjects of all parts for one year to the satisfaction of the head of the college and appear for examination in all the subjects
Provided that if a student appearing for the Third DHMS Homexamination has only one subject to pass at the end or prescribed chances he shall be allowed to appear at the next examination in that particular subject and shall complete the examination with this special chance
viiiAll examinations shall be held on such dates time and places as the examining body may determine
ix The examining body may under exceptional circumstances partially or wholly cancel any examination conducted by it under intimation to the Central Council of Homeopathy and arrange for conducting reexamination in those subjects within a period of thirty days from the date of such cancellation
This Regulation deals with results and readmission to an examination
A close reading of the above brings out the following In clause iv as to what is to happen in the event of a candidate failing to pass in a subject or subjects is spoken to
He may be admitted to the supplementary examination
Such a supplementary examination is to ordinarily take place after six weeks from the publication of result of First Examination
Supposing he passes in that subject or subjects in the supplementary examination he is declared to have passed at the examination as a whole
This should obviously be so because once he completes all the subjects he has to necessarily be declared to have passed
Merely on this language declared to have passed at the examination as a whole we are unable to understand as to how the 321 doctrine of relation back could ever be invoked
The invocation of such a doctrine leads to strange results
When a candidate completes the subjects only in the supplementary examination then alone he passes the examination
It is that pass which is declared
If the doctrine of relation back is applied it would have the effect of deeming to have passed in the annual examination held at the end of 12 months which on the face of it is untrue
With this we pass on to clause vi which deals with the stage where the candidate had failed in the First Annual Examination in a subject or subjects and he had not passed in that subject or subjects in the supplementary examination also
The next annual examination arrives
The appearance in that examination is conditioned upon production of two certificates iA certificate required under the Regulations to the effect that he had attended to the satisfaction of the Principle iiA certificate to the effect that he had undergone a further course of study for a period of next academic year in subject of subjects in which he had failed
Whatever it is a candidate has to complete all the subjects within four chances
Should he fail to do so he will have to undergo the course in all subjects for one yea unless of course he gets the exemption as stated in proviso to Clause vii
Nowhere do we find in Regulation 11 system of carry forward 
On the contrary it is detention every year
The High Court was moved by the fact that if a candidate were to pass in supplementary examination after passing the examination he will have to remain at home till the next annual examination
So he is allowed to undergo a course for next academic year provisionally
On this line of reasoning clause iv  vi of Regulation II are sought to be harmoniously construed 
We are unable to accept this line of reasoning or the so called harmonious construction because it does violence to the language of the Regulation
It clearly violates the mandatory requirements of Regulation 9
It has already been noted as to what those requirements are
To repeat i The lapse of one year period between the passing of First DHMS examination and taking the Second DHMS examination
ii Subsequent to the passing of the First DHMS examination to undergo the course of study for one year
Therefore if a candidate passes in the supplementary examination the requirement of one year cannot be enforced
Worse still is 322 a case of a student who passes only at the next annual examination
Could he be allowed to take the Second DHMS examination without even completing the First
Should he by chance pass the Second DHMS and not complete the First since he is still one more chance to take this examination what is to happen The situation is absurd
The same principle should apply to Regulation 10 where the lapse is one and half years
The word supplement  is defined in Oxford Dictionary Seventh Edition page 1072 think added to remedy deficiencies part added to book etc with further information or to periodical for treatment of particular matters of an angleMathits deficiency from 180ofCOMPLEMENT hence Al ARY mem adjssupplementay benefit
MEfL sup plementum f plere fill see ment Thereforethe adjective supplementary  means and examination to makeup the deficiencies
it stands to reason only when deficiencies are made up the whole becomes complete
On this score to say that passing the supplementary examination would relate back to the annual examination will be totally incorrect
What counts is when the whole is made up
From that time of making up one year or one and half years must elapse for second or Third DHMS examinations as the case Amy be
The stand of the appellants counsel as seen from letter dated 12121989 is as follows From Dr PL Verma Secretary Central Council of Homeopathy 10 Community Centre Basant Lok Vasant Vihar New Delhi 110037
TO The Chairman The Council Homoeopathic Systems of Medicine 3027 28 Sector 22 D Chandigarh
323 SubEnforcement of DHMS Diploma Course Regulation 1983 wef1983 84 Academic Sessions students demand for grant of provisional promotion with reappearance in only one subject to the next higher class even beyond supplementary examination even prior to his passing the lower class examination as a whole
With reference to your letter No CHSM PV 134 891253 dated 29 30 November 1989 on the subject noted above
I am to say that the question of permitting to appear simultaneously for two examinations ie lower reappear subjects and complete subjects of the next higher class does not arise as no candidate has to be admitted to the Second DHMS examination unless he had passed the first DHMS examination at the end of one year previously and has regularly attended the course for one year
Similarly no candidate shall be admitted to the Third DHM section examination unless he has passed the second DHMS examination 1 12 years previously and has also attended the course for a period of 1 12 years subsequent to his passing of the Second DHMS Examination
COUNCIL OF HOMOEOPATHIC SYSTEM OF MEDICINE 3027 28 Sector 22 D CHANDIGARH UT No CHCH PV 913489AT 198 200 Dated 5290 Copy forwarded to the Principal Lord Mahaveera Homeopathic Medical College LudhianaAboharChandigarh for information and necessary action
This may please be notified for information of all the students under intimation to the undersigned
The above guidelinesdirections of the Central Council may please be strictly followed and observed in respect of matters indicated therein
sd RK Sharma Registrar NoCHMSPV13489AI 201 210 Dated 5290
 This stand in our opinion is correct
If a student were to sit idle at home after passing the supplementary 324 examination that is his own making
To avoid such a situation the Regulation cannot be construed causing violence to the language
These Regulations are plain enough and are susceptible only to literary interpretation
In Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes  12th Edition it is stated at page 29 as under Where the language is plain and admits of but one meaning the task of interpretation can hardly be said to arise
The decision in this case said Lord Morris of Borth y Gest in a revenue case calls for a full and fair application of particular statutory language to particular facts as found
The desirability or the undesirability of one conclusion as compared with another cannot furnish a guide in reaching a decision Shop and Store Developments Ltd vs IRC 1967 1 AC 472
Where by the use of clear and unequivocal language capable of only one meaning anything is enacted by the legislature it must be enforced however harsh or absurd or contrary to common sense the result may beCartledge vs E Jopling  Sons Ltd
The interpretation of a statue is not to be collected from any notions which may be entertained by the court as to what is just and expedient Gwynne vs Burnell Words are not to be construed contrary to their meaning as embracing or excluding cases merely because no good reason appears why they should not be embraced or excluded
Whitehead vs James Stott Ltd The duty of the court is to expound the law as it stands and to leave the remedy if one be resolved upon to others Sutters vs Briggs We construe the Regulations as they stand without introducing any element of ambiguity or absurdity
The manner in which the respondents have passed the examination is set out in the following tabulated statement CWP No 13926 of 1991 Miss Kamaljit  eight others of LM Homoeopathic Medical College Ludhiana
1st profAnnual88 Supp88 Annual89 Respondent No Re appear Re appear Pass 325 1 Miss Kamaljit in 3 in 2 Contddo Sawam subjects subjects Singh Admitted in 1987 Resp2 Re appear pass ShNarinder in 2 Contd Kumar so subjects Satya Pal Goyal Admitted in 1987  RespNo 3 Shri Re appear pass ContdMohd Ramzan in 3 Thind so SH subjects Moh Yousaf Admitted in 1987 Resp No4 Shri Re appears Re appears pass  Naresh Kumar in 3 subjects in 2 subjects RespNo5 Shri Re appear Re appear pass  Jaininder Mohan in 2 in 1 so Shri Sham Lal subjects subject Admitted in 1987 RespNo 6 Shri Re appear Re appear pass  Kulbir Singh so in 3 in 2 Sh
Tattan Singh subjects subjects Admitted in 1987 ResNo 7 Re appear pass  Narinder Singh in1 so ShSant subject Singh Admitted in 1987 Res
No 8 Inderjit Mehta do Anant Ram Mehta Admitted in 1987 RespNo 9 Fail Re appear pass
Tejvinder Singh in1 so Jaswant Singh Admitted in 1987 326 Continued Part IInd Prof CWP No 481of 1991
3rd Prof CWP No 1392691 Suppl89 Annual90 Suppl91 Re appear Re appear Re appear Allowed to appear in 3 in 3 in1 as per court subjects subjects subject order dt6991 by the Principal of L Homoeopathic Medical College
Re appear Re appear pass As per court in 3 in1 order dt6991 subjects subject without court order
Re appear Re appear pass Not appeared in 4 in 1 subjects subject
Re appear Re appear pass As per court in 3 in1 orderdt 6991 Fail
Re appear pass As per court in 2 order subjects dt6991 Re appear Re appear pass
As per court in 1 pass Order subject dt6991 Re appear Re appear pass Allowed to in 2 in 2 appear as subjects subjects per Court order dt6991
Mr Ranjit Kumar pleads before us that equities must weigh in favour of students
With reference to that plea we hold that he students who had completed the whole course attended all the courses of study for the three sessions of 12 months 12 months and 18 months respectively and had passed all the examinations in all the subjects though not in the sequential order required by the 327 regulations it appears to us that the submission of the counsel for the respondents that they being required to go through the courses all over again and take the examinations after attending the courses afresh might lead to hardship and might require consideration
In the words of Anne Sophie Swetchine The world has no sympathy with any but positive griefs it will pity you for what you lose but never for what you lack
We think that their cases may perhaps have to be examined from the point of these equities by the Council of Homeopathic System of Medicines
The candidates who as on today have attended all the courses and have passed all the examinations might make an appropriate representation to the Council of Homeopathic System of Medicines the appellant to consider their cases
The representation shall be filed within a period of four weeks from today
The Council of Homeopathic System of Medicines the appellant will take appropriate decision within one month thereafter
The Council in doing so shall bear in mind all the relevant circumstances including perhaps the spirit of the corresponding regulations under the Bihar Act in which such sequential purpose is not insisted upon


Summary:
On May 27 1978 the petitioner entered into an arbitration agreement under which he had to execute a certain work within 9 months
He averred that he had sent his bills on July 12 1979 but payment was not made
On November 28 1989 for the first time he sent a notice to the respondent for reference to arbitration
The respondent approached the High Court under Ss 512 and 33 of the 
A learned Single Judge held that the claim was hopelessly barred by limitation and cancelled the arbitration agreement
A Division Bench dismissed the Appeal
On appeal this Court addressed itself to 2 questions Whether the High Court could permit a party to rescind an arbitration agreement and whether delay can be a ground for rescinding such agreement
Dismissing the appeal this Court HELD1
The Court has the power and jurisdiction under Ss 5 and 12 to grant leave to the applicant in exceptional circumstances to revoke the contract of arbitration
The Court should exercise the power sparingly cautiously and with circumspection in permitting a party to rescind an arbitration agreement he had entered into voluntarily
365 B 2By virtue of section 37 of the  the provisions of the Limitation Act would apply to arbitrations notwithstanding any term in the contract to the contrary
366 B 3The period of limitation for the commencement of an arbitration runs from the date on which had there been no arbitration clause the cause of 362 action would have accrued just as in the case of actions the claim is not to be brought after the expiration of a specified number of years from the date on which the cause of action accrued so in the case of arbitrations the claim is not to be put forward after the expiration of the specified number of years from the date when the claim accrued
368 D E Ram Dutt Ramkissen dass vs
SassoonEDCo1929561A 128PC Naamlooze Vennootschap Handels En Transport Maatschappij  Vulcan  vs AS J Ludwig Mowinckels Rederi 1 938 2 All ER 152 Pegler vs Railway Executive at 338 and West Riding of Yorkshire Country Council Huddersfield Corporation 1957 1 AR ER 669 and Russell on Arbitrations Justice Bachawat Law of Arbitration applied
Delay defeats justice Defaulting party should hear the hardship and should not transmit the hardship to the other party after the claim in the cause of arbitration was allowed to he barred
369 F  Mustiu and Boyd s Commercial Arbitration 1982 edn referred to
The claim in the case on hand is undoubtedly hope lessly barred by limitation as the petitioner by his conduct slept over his right for more than 10 years
The High Court justifiably exercised the discretionary power and jurisdiction under Ss 5 and 12 2 b in permitting the respondent to rescind the agreement
370 E