M.L.SINGHAL, J. - (1.) THIS is a revision against the order dated 9.11.1999 of District Judge, Chandigarh. This revision has arisen in the following circumstances :
(2.) SHRI R.R. Bhardwaj (Arbitrator) gave award which was made rule of the Court vide order dated 9.6.1992 of Subordinate Judge, Ist Class, Chandigarh, in favour of M/s R.K. Plastics against the Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation Limited, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). Objections filed by the Corporation against the award were dismissed. Corporation filed appeal No. 102 of 1992 against order dated 9.6.1992 before the learned District Judge, Chandigarh. During the pendency of the appeal, the Corporation made an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure whereby it was prayed that the decree passed by Sub Judge, Ist Class, Chandigarh dated 9.6.1992 making award the rule of the Court, be set aside and further action be taken against the respondents for playing fraud upon the Corporation. It was alleged in this application that agreement was signed by Shri M.M. Chhabra in the year 1985 alleging himself to be the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. On 4.12.1989, claims were made by M/s R.K. Plastics through sole proprietor Piare Lal before the Arbitrator. At no stage, the concern-M/s R.K. Plastics disclosed the fact that its sole proprietorship had been changed from Shri M.M. Chhabra to Shri Piare Lal. It was also not clear whether Shri M.M. Chhabra was the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics in the year 1985 because he had only signed for M/s R.K. Plastics. It was further alleged in the application that Shri Piare Lal had never met any official of the Corporation and he had never been seen by any official of the Corporation. It was not known whether there was any such person in existence or he was an imaginary figure. There was another agreement with M/s R.K. Plastics in the year 1988 which was signed by Shri Rajiv Marwaha. Out of this agreement also, one claim was referred to the Arbitrator. On 9.1.1991, Rajiv Marwaha also filed one affidavit. One application was filed on 15.1.1991 in which Piare Lal had mentioned that he was authoritsed signatory of M/s R.K. Plastics. There is another affidavit dated 13.8.1990 filed by Piare Lal stating that he is the sole proprietor. In this case, claim was filed on 16.12.1992 on behalf of M/s R.K. Plastics by Shri R.K. Chhabra as sole proprietor. On 15.12.1998 one application was moved by Parteek Chhabra, son of Shri P.R. Chhabra, stating himself to be the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. It was further stated that M/s R.K. Plastics being the sole proprietorship concern could not file claims by itself as it was not a juristic person and the claim could only be filed by sole proprietor himself. In both the cases mentioned above, Shri P.S. Rana, Advocate, was the counsel throughout for M/s R.K. Plastics. There was some fraud being played by M/s R.K. Plastics. These facts came to the knowledge when the appeal was being prepared for arguments on 27.10.1999. M/s R.K. Plastics has committed a fraud and cheated the Corporation by receiving the award amount alone with interest. It was prayed that the decree be set aside and criminal action be taken against the decree holder the present respondents for procuring this award.
(3.) THIS application was opposed by M/s R.K. Plastics. It was urged that this application is not maintainable under any provision of law whatever. The Corporation had filed objections against the award which were dismissed by the Court vide order dated 9.6.1992 and the award was made rule of the Court. No such objection or point was raised when the objections were filed against the award dated 23.3.1990. No such objections or points were taken in the grounds of appeal filed against the order dated 9.6.1992, whereby award had been made rule of the Court and objections were dismissed. Award cannot be set aside on any ground whatsoever if an objection is not taken within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of notice of the filing of the award. Since no such objection was taken in the objection petition, the same could not be taken in appeal, more particularly, when the appeal was filed in the year 1992 and it has been pending since then. It was urged that the objection petition cannot be allowed to be amended and no objection can be added if not raised in the objection petition. This application was filed simply to further delay the decision of the appeal on merits. Objections against the award were filed on 30.4.1990 by the Corporation and after the expiry of more than 9 years, no fresh ground can be permitted to be raised on behalf of the appellant for attacking the award and setting aside the decree. It was further urged that no such objection can be allowed to be raised now after a lapse of 7 years of the pendency of the appeal when this objection could be decided only after adducing evidence. Objection poses disputed questions of fact which cannot be decided without evidence. Application is frivolous. It was denied that Shri Chhabra ever became sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. He never signed as sole proprietor. He might have signed for M/s R.K. Plastics. Mere signing for M/s R.K. Plastics did not enshrine him as the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. It was only Shri Piare Lal Khanna who was the proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics, which was a concern duly registered with the Small Scale Industries Department having permanent sales tax number and had been supplying material to the Corporation. After Shri P.L. Khanna, Shri Rajiv Marwaha became sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics and thereafter Shir P.R. Chhabra became the sole proprietor and at present Shri Parteek Chhabra is the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. Mere change in the proprietorship of the concern, is no ground for setting aside the award. Claim petition was signed by Shri P.L. Khanna on 4.12.1989 when he was the sole proprietor. It was Shri P.L. Khanna who started business in the name of M/s R.K. Plastics. He got the concern registered as small scale industry, got the sales tax number and supplied the material to the Corporation and received the payment therefor. If Shri Rajiv Marwaha signed agreement in 1988 for M/s R.K. Plastics when he was not the sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics, that would not enshrine him as the sole proprietor. Shri Rajiv Marwaha became sole proprietor and as such, submitted affidavit dated 9.1.1991. No affidavit dated 13.8.1990 was ever submitted by Shri P.L. Khanna. Sh. P.L. Khanna signed the applications as authorised signatory. It was denied that the same was signed by Shri P.L. Khanna as sole proprietor. Shri P.R. Chhabra rightly filed claim petition on 16.12.1992 as by that time he had become sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics. Parteek Chhabra filed application on 15.12.1995 as he had become sole proprietor of M/s R.K. Plastics by 15.12.1995. There was no question of fraud being played by M/s R.K. Plastics by regularly supplying material to the Corporation for than 6 years and the Corporation had been receiving material and making payment therefor to M/s R.K. Plastics. In another arbitration case, Corporation took similar type of objection in 1995 and Arbitrator gave the award on 29.12.1995.;