Palok Basu, J. - (1.) Since both these First Appeals From Orders raise similar questions, they are being disposed by this common Judgment after the learned counsel for the parties at substantial length.
(2.) Two questions of importance have arisen in these two cases. First, whether Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act has been attracted to the facts of the case and filing of objections before the Court of Civil Judge within the time allowed by law can be taken to be a valid filing for the purposes of getting those objections decided on merits even though it has been ultimately found that those two objections should have been filed before the Court of District Judge, and, second, in filing the said objections against the awards before the Civil Judge bona fides of the objector exists or not. It is undisputed that the awards in these two cases were passed by the Arbitrator on 3.11.97 and 12.11.97 respectively. Objections against the awards were filed on 31.1.98 and 10.2.98 respectively before the Civil Judge, Meerut. On 4.8.98, the Civil Judge, Meerut held that he had no jurisdiction to decide those objections on merits and the District Judge alone was the competent court to deal with them and consequently by his order dated 4.8.98 had directed that the objections should be filed before the District Judge. Meerut. Actually order was obtained from the Court of Civil Judge on 17.8.98 in both the cases and the same was filed before the Court of District Judge on that very date. i.e.. on 17.8.98. It is on these facts and circumstances, the aforesaid two questions have arisen.
(3.) M/s. Chaddha Construction Company admittedly had entered into two contracts, i.e., Nos. 1 and 9 with Meerut Development Authority, Meerut. Some dispute has arisen. M/s. Chadda Construction Company filed Suit Nos. 481 of 1997 and 482 of 1997 with regard to contract Nos. 1 and 9 respectively. The matter appears to have been taken up before the Arbitrator. The appellant's case is that the aforesaid awards passed by the Tribunal on 3.11.97 and 12.11.97 were ex parte awards whereas the case of the respondents' is that those awards were decided on merits and it is baseless to say that the aforesaid awards were passed ex parte. Be that as it may. the said orders can and should only be gone into before the appropriate Court.;