IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 Arb.A.No. 8 of 2010() --------------------- OPARB.138/2008 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------ S.VINOBHA, AGED 35, S/O.SIVARAMAN, KIZHAKKEVILA VEEDU, PARIPALLY P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. THE ARBITRATOR, A.S.HEBBEAR, ADVOCATE AND ARBITRATOR, KALPANA ANEX, NEAR KALPANA TALKIES, UDUPPI 576 101, KARNATAKA. 2. M/S.MAHARASHTRA APEX CORPORATION LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT,1930 HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT SYNDICATE HOUSE, MANIPAL 675 119 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.K.GOPALAKRISHNA BATT. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, MAHARASTHRA APEX CORPORATION LTD., OPP.UPASANA HOSPITAL, SABEENA MANSION, N.H.203, CONDONMENT CHERRY, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU FOR R2-3 THIS ARBITRATION APPEALS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------- Arb.A No.8 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Basheer,J. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the District Judge, Kollam on an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to set aside the award passed by the Arbitrator. 2. The court below after considering the preliminary issue, whether the application was barred by limitation held that it was barred and accordingly dismissed the application. The said order is under challenge in this appeal. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondents. 4. It is beyond controversy that the Arbitrator passed the award on December 29, 2007. Photocopy of the award was served on the appellant on May 15, 2008. The Original Petition under Section 34 was filed on June 05, 2008. However, the court below took the view that the appellant ought to have adduced evidence to show that he Arb.A No.8 of 2010 2 had received photocopy of the award only on May, 15, 2008. 5. It is pointed out by the learned counsel that the original copy of the award was subsequently produced before the court on July 29, 2008 which clearly revealed that the contention raised by the appellant that he had received photocopy of the award only on May 15, 2008 was correct. Appellant has produced the postal records and also the notice issued by the counsel for the appellant to the Arbitrator requesting him to furnish a certified copy of the award. In this communication appellant had stated that he received photocopy of the award only on May 15, 2008. 6. On a perusal of the entire materials available on record, we have no hesitation to hold that the the Original Petition was not barred by limitation as concluded by the court below. In our view, the application was well within the statutory period of limitation. Therefore, the finding entered by the court below in this regard is set aside. Arb.A No.8 of 2010 3 7. The case is remitted to the court below. The court below shall consider the matter on merit and dispose of the same, in accordance with law. The court below shall make an earnest endeavor to dispose of the case, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Parties shall appear before the court below on May 17, 2010. A.K.BASHEER,JUDGE P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE ma Arb.A No.8 of 2010 4 Arb.A No.8 of 2010 5