HARI SHANKAR SINGHANIA Vs. GAUR HARI SINGHANIA
LAWS(SC)-2006-4-33
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on April 04,2006

HARI SHANKAR SINGHANIA Appellant
VERSUS
GAUR HARI SINGHANIA Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

ASHOK MADAN VS. HIMACHAL PRADESH URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. [LAWS(HPH)-2013-9-91] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHU LAL VS. LAXMI [LAWS(P&H)-2006-8-150] [REFERRED TO]
R. MUTHULAKSHMI VS. VALLIAMMAL [LAWS(MAD)-2021-7-304] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH PRASAD VS. PARSHU RAM [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-8-95] [REFERRED TO]
UNITED INSURANCE CO LTD VS. HARJIT SINGH RAINA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-1-46] [REFERRED TO]
PAWAN KUMAR ARYA VS. RAVI KUMAR ARYA [LAWS(SC)-2020-3-11] [REFERRED TO]
SHREE RAM MILLS LTD VS. UTILLITY PREMISES P LTD [LAWS(SC)-2007-3-131] [REFERRED TO]
ASHES DEB VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2019-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
GAURI SHANKAR AGARWALLA VS. MADANLAL AGARWALLA [LAWS(GAU)-2010-8-94] [REFERRED TO]
M GNANASAMBANDAM VS. M RAJA APPAR [LAWS(MAD)-2009-2-65] [REFERRED TO]
ENNORE PORT TRUST CHENNAI VS. HCC VAN OORD ACZ JOINT VENTURE HINCON HOUSE LBS MARG VIKHROLI WEST MUMBAI [LAWS(MAD)-2009-8-245] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDER MOHAN RANA VS. PREM PRAKASH CHAUDHARY [LAWS(DLH)-2011-9-16] [REFERRED TO]
NEEL ELECTRO TECHNIQUES VS. NEELKANTH POWER SOLUTION [LAWS(BOM)-2014-6-49] [REFERRED TO]
INDERJIT BAJAJ & ORS VS. SUBHASH CHANDER BAJAJ & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-12-207] [REFERRED TO]
JAYAWANT BALIRAMJI PANCHBHAI SINCE DEAD, THROUGH HIS LEGAL HERIS & ORS. VS. ANUSUYABAI VASANTRAO DESHMUKH [LAWS(BOM)-2017-6-146] [REFERRED TO]
SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENT CO LTD VS. ARBITRATOR MANAGING DIRECTOR [LAWS(ALL)-2010-4-114] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB STATE VS. DINA NATH [LAWS(SC)-2007-5-138] [REFERRED TO]
TERRA INFRA DEVELOPMENT LIMITED VS. M/S. NCC LIMITED [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-6-98] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOKARAJAN VS. DR.PADMARAJAN [LAWS(MAD)-2016-9-16] [REFERRED TO]
S.JEGATHEESAN VS. S.VAIKUNDARAJAN [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-389] [REFERRED TO]
R. SUNDARAM VS. RAJA THEATERS [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-608] [REFERRED TO]
M/S VAJRA CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED VS. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(PAT)-2015-11-98] [REFERRED]
GODAWARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT VS. PAWAR AND COMPANY [LAWS(BOM)-2013-2-30] [REFERRED TO]
TVC INDIA PVT LTD VS. ABN AMRO BANK N V [LAWS(DLH)-2008-2-186] [REFERRED TO]
AMARESH DAS VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2007-5-7] [REFERRED TO]
DSC LIMITED & ANR VS. S P SINGLA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2018-11-255] [REFERRED TO]
Y BHASKARA RAJU RAILWAY CONTRACTOR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2009-2-39] [REFERRED TO]
SUNDER KUKREJA AND ORS. VS. MOHAN LAL KUKREJA AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-10-248] [REFERRED TO]
VINAY RAI VS. ANIL RAI [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-160] [REFERRED TO]
BARCO ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS PVT LTD VS. KIRAN MALIK [LAWS(DLH)-2011-12-231] [REFERRED TO]
JIWAN MEHTA VS. EMMBROS METAL PVT. LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2010-1-101] [REFERRED TO]
PREM PRAKASH CHAUDHARY VS. RAJINDER MOHAN RANA [LAWS(DLH)-2011-2-446] [REFERRED TO]
RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD VS. ARVINDBHAI RAMBHAI PATEL [LAWS(SC)-2006-8-82] [REFERRED TO]
REJI P MATHEW VS. REMI JOSEPH KUMPALATHU [LAWS(KER)-2008-11-30] [REFERRED TO]
MARIYAMMA THOMAS VS. REMI JOSEPH [LAWS(KER)-2008-11-40] [REFERRED TO]
KESHARIMAL JAIN VS. LAXMICHAND JAIN [LAWS(MPH)-2006-8-96] [REFERRED]
MRS. BIMLA HALAN VS. CHANDULAL PATODIA [LAWS(ORI)-2014-12-89] [REFERRED TO]
KASIM BEEVI VS. SOWR BEEVI [LAWS(MAD)-2007-5-11] [REFERRED TO]
ILABEN D/O VASANJIAKHABHAI AND W/O BIPINCHANDRA ISHWARLAL DESAI VS. HARSHADBHAI RAMANBHAI [LAWS(GJH)-2018-9-306] [REFERRED TO]
Y BHASKARA RAJU VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2007-10-86] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMEDHUSSAIN ABDULLABHAI VS. SHABBIRBHAI ABDULLABHAI [LAWS(BOM)-2017-10-172] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYPAT SINGHANIA VS. HARI SHANKAR SINGHANIA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-10-64] [REFERRED TO]
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. VS. ESSAR OIL LIMITED AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2016-1-60] [REFERRED TO]
MADANKUWAR AND ORS. VS. SUSHILA AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2016-4-25] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI POWER COMPANY LIMITED VS. HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCTS LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2007-7-25] [REFERRED TO]
SH RAJESH KUMAR GARG VS. MCD [LAWS(DLH)-2008-3-28] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH BHARDWAJ VS. NITYANAND BHARADWAJ [LAWS(DLH)-2019-7-89] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPDHARSHAN BUILDERS PVT. LTD. VS. SAROJ, WIDOW OF SATISH SUNDERRAO TRASIKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2018-11-55] [REFERRED TO]
SATYANARAYAN RAJARAM CHINTA VS. MARVEL REALTORS & DEVELOPERS LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2019-9-171] [REFERRED TO]
M RAJA APPAR VS. M GNANASAMBANDAM [LAWS(MAD)-2009-2-5] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHU DEVI VS. VIJAY LAXMI [LAWS(HPH)-2012-2-27] [REFERRED TO]
AMIYA KUMAR BISWASRAY VS. DILLIP KUMAR BISWASRAY AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-2015-1-33] [REFERRED TO]
RANGANAYAKAMMA VS. K S PRAKASH [LAWS(SC)-2008-5-30] [REFERRED TO]
GEO MILLER & CO. PVT. LTD. VS. CHAIRMAN, RAJASTHAN VIDYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD [LAWS(SC)-2019-9-4] [REFERRED TO]
CLP INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LTD [LAWS(SC)-2020-5-5] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDER KAUR GREWAL VS. MANJIT KAUR [LAWS(SC)-2020-7-17] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH GUPTA VS. BECHU SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2021-12-238] [REFERRED TO]
NARINDER NATH SETH & ORS VS. LATA SETH & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-4-104] [REFERRED TO]
HINDUSTAN VIDYUT PRODUCTS LTD VS. DELHI POWER COMPANY LTD & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2018-8-114] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL MUNIREDDY VS. APPAIAH REDDY [LAWS(KAR)-2014-9-97] [REFERRED TO]
JUBIDA BIBI VS. RAFIQUE MOHAMMED [LAWS(ORI)-2008-12-66] [REFERRED TO]
MUKUND SUBHASH KARWA & ORS VS. KRISHIDHAN SEEDS PVT LTD [LAWS(NCLT)-2017-9-363] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDER KUMAR VS. RAMESHWAR KUMAR [LAWS(DLH)-2012-10-155] [REFERRED TO]
RAM ASREY VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION SULTNAPUR [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-197] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA BAI VS. HINDUSTAN STEEL LIMITED [LAWS(CHH)-2008-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
RAJIV SANGHVI VS. PRADIP R. KAMDAR [LAWS(BOM)-2022-6-144] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH GUPTA VS. ANAND GUPTA [LAWS(DLH)-2020-9-194] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN CHAND VS. GUJRU RAM [LAWS(HPH)-2012-1-111] [REFERRED TO]
DOLA RAM & OTHERS VS. GANGA SINGH & OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-11-86] [REFERRED TO]
RAHIM DIN VS. FAQIR MOHAMMAD [LAWS(P&H)-2007-12-80] [REFERRED TO]
TILAK RAJ BAKSHI VS. AVINASH CHAND SHARMA [LAWS(SC)-2019-8-72] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA VS. PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2014-5-377] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK BERI VS. ATUL BERI [LAWS(DLH)-2020-12-138] [REFERRED TO]
HARINARAYAN & CO VS. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD [LAWS(CHH)-2013-11-32] [REFERRED TO]
MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED VS. UE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT LTD [LAWS(APH)-2011-3-27] [REFERRED TO]
YOGESH KUMAR GUPTA VS. ANURADHA RANGRAJAN [LAWS(DLH)-2007-2-164] [REFERRED TO]
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED VS. RELIANCE ENERGY LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2013-1-35] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYPAT SINGHANIA VS. HARI SHANKAR SINGHANIA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-3-222] [REFERRED TO 3,9,12,24]
S K MOHAMMED KASIM VS. KADAR IBRAHIM ROWTHER AND SONS [LAWS(MAD)-2011-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
M/S B & S ENGINEERING COMPANY, UDAIPUR VS. M/S SUBH BUILDERS, UDAIPUR [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-2-28] [REFERRED TO]
R.B. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY VS. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, RAJASTHAN URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE [LAWS(RAJ)-2011-6-61] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHOUDHARY VS. ARVIND KUMAR [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-10-171] [REFERRED TO]
RASBIHARI VS. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,SAWAI MADHOPUR, RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-8-63] [REFERRED TO]
EXCHANGE INDIA LIMITED VS. ANGERIPALAYAM COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-800] [REFERRED TO]
G RAVINDRA, VS. M THIMMA REDDY, [LAWS(KAR)-2014-3-346] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN KRISHAN GUPTA VS. PRABHA GUPTA [LAWS(SC)-2009-2-125] [REFERRED TO]
TARINI MEHTA VS. SANJEEV CHHABRA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-484] [REFERRED TO]
DEBI PRASAD SATAPATHY, SON OF BRAHMANANDA SATAPATHY VS. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH [LAWS(BOM)-2017-10-173] [REFERRED TO]
GANGA PRASAD RAI VS. KEDAR NATH RAI [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-380] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF J&K VS. ADIL CONSTRUCTION CO. [LAWS(J&K)-2015-12-62] [REFERRED TO]
TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. KIRLOSKAR CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENGINEERS LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2008-6-577] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal was directed against the final judgment and order dated 8/9th June, 2004 passed by the Division Bench of the high Court of judicature at Bombay in Appeal no. 440 of 1996 in Arbitration Suit No. 1904 of 1992 whereby the High Court dismissed the appellants' appeal and upheld the order of the learned single Judge dismissing the appellants' application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 as being barred by the law of limitation.
(2.)The short facts of the case are as follows:-" (1) A partnership firm was formed by three brothers of the Singhania family. The family owned considerable amount of immovable property, which was brought into the firm's business. In 1987, the partnership firm was dissolved by way of dissolution deed as a family settlement. Under the dissolution deed, clause 13 which enabled the parties or any party to go for arbitration in case there was a dispute between them reads as follows:""13. That if at any time any dispute, doubt or question shall arise between the parties hereto or their respective legal representative, either on the construction of interpretation of these presents or respecting the accounts, transactions, profit or loss of business or their respective rights and obligations of the parties hereto or otherwise in relation to the winding up of the partnership, then any such dispute, doubt or question shall be referred to the arbitration of a single Arbitrator. In case, however, the parties are unable to agree upon a single arbitrator, a panel of three Arbitrators shall be appointed, one of them to be appointed by shri Hari Shankar Singhania or failing him by the sixth party, or failing the sixth party by the seventh party, or failing the seventh party, by the eighth party and the second to be appointed by Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania and failing him by the second party and failing the second party by the ninth party and the third to be appointed by Shri Vijaypat Singhania and failing him by the fourth party, provided always that the decision and/or award by the said panel of the arbitrators shall have to be unanimous and in the event of unanimity not being reached by th'e panel of arbitrators, they shall appoint an Umpire whose decision shall be final. All the proceedings, before the sole arbitrator and/or panel of arbitrators shall be governed by the provisions contained in the arbitration Act, 1940 or by any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof. "" (2) Disagreement between the parties took place as to the division of the assets involved in the partnership firm. Therefore, the distribution of the said immoveable properties could not be effected by 31st May 1987 as contemplated by the Deed of Dissolution. Ultimately in February 1988, the three groups each appointed a nominee to work out an arrangement whereby distribution of the said immoveable properties of the said dissolved firm could be made and effected in the manner acceptable to all. The nominees held several meetings but no agreement of distribution could be arrived at. Further it can be observed that there were numerous letters written by both parties to find a way to settle the dispute pertaining to the division of assets involved in the partnership firm which was dissolved. The last letter that was exchanged in this regard was a letter dated 29 September, 1989. "" (3) On May 8,1992, a plaint under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 was filed before the High Court of judicature at bombay by the appellants (1-7 ousted group). On September 19, 1992, respondent no. 1 herein, dr. Gaur Hari Singhania group (contesting respondent nos. 1-9) filed an affidavit in opposition stating and submitting that, the suit filed by the appellant in the High Court is barred by limitation and that the High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and, therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed. " (4) It is pertinent to notice that respondent nos. 10-20 supported the claim made by the appellants. A learned single Judge of the Bombay High Court on April 09, 1996 dismissed the arbitration suit of the appellants on the ground of limitation being 50 days beyond the period of three years computed from march 18, 1989. An appeal was preferred by appellant nos. 1-7 and learned judges of the Division Bench of the Bombay high Court dismissed the appeal on the ground of limitation and that oral prayer for condonation of delay will not be entertained by the courts. "" (5) Against this order of the Bombay High court, the appellants have come by way of special leave petition before this Court. Leave was granted on 03. 01.2005 by this court.
(3.)We heard Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsel appearing for appellants 1-7, mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 10-20 and Mr. Anil Diwan, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents 1-9.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.