L.N.MITTAL, J. - (1.) ALLOWED as prayed for.
(2.) IN this appeal, order dated 18.09.2012 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, is under challenge. By the said order learned lower court has dismissed the application filed by appellant under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 along with petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, 'the Act'). Dispute between appellant and respondent No.1 was referred to respondents No.2 and 3 and another person as arbitrators. Respondents No.2 and 3 gave award dated 06.03.2008 (Annexure A-2). Appellant filed petition under Section 34 of the Act at Chandigarh on 26.03.2008 to challenge the said award. Learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh vide order dated 10.11.2009 (Annexure A-4) held that Court at Chandigarh had no territorial jurisdiction to try the said petition and, therefore, ordered return of the said petition to the appellant for presentation before the court of competent jurisdiction at Patiala. Thereafter, the appellant filed fresh petition under Section 34 of the Act in court at Patiala to challenge the award of the arbitrators. Along with said petition, the appellant also filed application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act for excluding the period spent by the appellant in prosecuting its petition under Section 34 of the Act at Chandigarh. The said application was resisted by respondent No.1. Learned Additional District Judge, Patiala vide impugned order dated 18.09.2012 has held that application of the appellant under section 14 of the Limitation Act does not help the petitioner/appellant and even after applying Section 14 of the Limitation Act to the case, petition under Section 34 of the Act is not within limitation. Accordingly, application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act has been dismissed along with petition under Section 34 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, appellant has filed this appeal.
(3.) I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file.;