FAO No.689 of 2009 - 1 – IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** FAO No.689 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 27.04.2009 **** Dharam Pal . . . . Appellant VS. State of Haryana through Executive Engineer, PWD, Public Health Division, Kurukshetra. . . . . Respondent **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: Mr.S.K. Rishi, Advocate for the appellant. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the District Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby objections filed by the appellant, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short ‘the Act’) against the award dated 6.7.2000, have been dismissed. The appellant argued on the point of limitation at the out set. It is contended by him that admittedly, the award has been passed by the Arbitrator on 6.7.2000 and the objections have been filed on 13.1.2007. It is also admitted that in terms of the provisions of Section 34 (iii) of the Act the objections could be filed within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the award and the period of limitation could be extended by the court only up FAO No.689 of 2009 - 2 – to 30 days. The counsel for the appellant contends that he had received copy of award on 13.1.2007 and filed the objections on 13.2.2007, therefore, the objections were within limitation. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. It has been observed by the learned court below that the Arbitrator had duly forwarded a copy of the award on 6.7.2000, which must have been received by the appellant in due course. However, even if the copy is not received by the appellant as alleged, he had the knowledge of the award as the same was placed in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Kurukshetra on 16.5.2003 in the petition filed under Section 36 of the Act dated 18.2.2003. It is also observed that the appellant did not mention anything about the receipt of the copy of the award and even before the Court below led no evidence except for his bald self serving statement that he did not receive the copy of the award from the Arbitrator. I have thoughtfully considered the finding recorded by the Court below and I am of the opinion that the bald statement of the appellant cannot be believed that he received the copy of the award on 13.1.2007 specially when he himself filed objections under Section 36 of the Act on 18.2.2003 and the copy of the award was placed before Civil Court on 16.5.2003. Thus, he had the knowledge but still he filed the present objections on 13.2.2007 which is hopelessly time barred. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Therefore, the same is hereby dismissed in limine. No costs. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) APRIL 27, 2009 JUDGE vivek