High Court Quashes Order Dismissing Application for Non-Filing of Certified Copy of Arbitral Award — Filing of Certified Copy is Mandatory Under Section 34(3) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that an application under Section 34 without certified copy is not maintainable and cannot be cured under Section 151 CPC.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: DHARWAD In Favour of Accused
  • 103
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, dated 24/08/2023, which dismissed their application (I.A.No.4) filed under Section 151 CPC seeking dismissal of the respondent's application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioners contended that the Section 34 application was not accompanied by a certified copy of the arbitral award, rendering it not maintainable. The court below rejected the petitioners' application. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the requirement of filing a certified copy of the award under Section 34(3) of the A&C Act is mandatory. The court observed that the application under Section 34 without a certified copy is not maintainable and the defect cannot be cured by invoking Section 151 CPC. Consequently, the High Court quashed the impugned order and allowed the writ petition, directing that the Section 34 application be dismissed as not maintainable.

Headnote

A) Arbitration Law - Section 34 Application - Certified Copy Requirement - Section 34(3) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court held that filing of a certified copy of the arbitral award is mandatory for maintainability of an application under Section 34. The application filed without certified copy is not maintainable and cannot be cured by invoking Section 151 CPC. (Paras 1-3)

B) Civil Procedure Code - Inherent Powers - Section 151 CPC - Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court held that inherent powers under Section 151 cannot be used to override mandatory statutory requirements. The defect of non-filing of certified copy cannot be condoned under Section 151 CPC. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is maintainable without being accompanied by a certified copy of the arbitral award, and whether the court can condone such defect under Section 151 CPC.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order dated 24/08/2023, and directed that the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 be dismissed as not maintainable.

Law Points

  • Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996 requires filing of certified copy of arbitral award
  • Section 151 CPC cannot be used to circumvent mandatory requirement
  • Limitation period under Section 34(3) is not extendable
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (10) 40

W.P No.105455 OF 2023

2023-10-05

Sachin Shankar Magadum

Smt. Archana A. Magadum for petitioners, Sri Rakesh Bilki for respondent 1

T. Younis and Others

National Highway Authority of India and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging order of District Court dismissing application under Section 151 CPC.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of order dated 24/08/2023 in A.A. No. 23/2022 and A.A. No. 25/2022 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari.

Filing Reason

Petitioners filed I.A.No.4 under Section 151 CPC requesting dismissal of respondent's application under Section 34 of A&C Act as not maintainable due to non-filing of certified copy of award.

Previous Decisions

The court below rejected I.A.No.4 filed by petitioners.

Issues

Whether an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is maintainable without being accompanied by a certified copy of the arbitral award? Whether the court can condone the defect of non-filing of certified copy under Section 151 CPC?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the Section 34 application is not maintainable as it is not accompanied by a certified copy of the award. Respondents contended that the defect can be cured under Section 151 CPC.

Ratio Decidendi

Filing of a certified copy of the arbitral award is mandatory for maintainability of an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The defect of non-filing cannot be cured by invoking Section 151 CPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The captioned petition is filed assailing the order of the Court below passed on I.A.No.4 filed under Section 151 of CPC, wherein the petitioners application filed in I.A.No.4 requesting the Court to dismiss the application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as not maintainable as application under Section 34 is not accompanied by a certified copy of the award.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed I.A.No.4 under Section 151 CPC in A.A. No. 23/2022 and A.A. No. 25/2022 before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, seeking dismissal of the respondent's Section 34 application for non-filing of certified copy. The court below rejected the application. The petitioners then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: 34
  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: 151
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Clarifies Referee Bench's Jurisdiction in Consumer Protection Act Reference. Referee Bench Cannot Decide Appeal Itself and Must Answer Referred Questions Before Returning Matter to Referring Bench Under Section 58(3), Consumer Protectio...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petitioner in Slum Rehabilitation Eligibility Dispute — Electricity Bill Alone Insufficient to Prove Commercial Use. The court held that while electricity records are relevant to prove existence of hutment and conne...