Civil Revision No. 3445 of 1996 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3445 of 1996 Date of decision: 14.5.2010 Haryana Tourism Corporation Limited ...Petitioner Versus M/s Saran Lal Ahuja and company and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. K.K.Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner None for the respondents. S.D.ANAND, J. Respondent No.1 entered into an agreement with the petitioner herein (Haryana Tourism Corporation Limited) for the expansion and addition of the building Maina Restaurant, a venture being run by the petitioner-corporation. A controversy between the parties was referred to an Arbitrator (respondent no.2) who gave his award dated 13.11.1988. Respondent no.1 filed a petition on 7.12.1988 for making the award a rule of the Court. The plea came to be allowed by the learned Trial Court, vide order dated 3.6.1993. The petitioner herein filed an appeal against that order which (appeal) came to be negatived by the learned District Court, vide order dated 7.3.1996. The petitioner is in revision. Civil Revision No. 3445 of 1996 -2- **** The solitary contention canvassed on behalf of the petitioner is that impugned award is invalid as it had been given after the statutory period of four months ( under the old Arbitration Act) was over and neither the Arbitrator nor the parties had obtained extension of that time from any Court. In that context, it is pointed out that the reference was made on 21.6.1988; while the award was given by the Arbitrator on .30.11.1988. The plea deserves to be negatived. The reasons therefor are as under:- The petitioner herein did not raise any objection in the context throughout the arbitration proceedings. Further, no grievance in that context was made before the learned Trial Court or before the learned Ist Appellate Court. This is the conceded factual position. In that view of things, it is not permissible for the petitioner to raise the plea aforementioned before this Court. The plea shall stand repelled accordingly. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. May 14, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge