- (1.) The appellant-company is aggrieved of the order dated 11.09.2013, whereby objections filed on behalf of Union of India against the award dated 25.04.2008, has been allowed on the ground that arbitration proceedings commenced under 1996 Act was not maintainable as originally arbitration proceedings commenced on 06.05.1992.
(2.) Mr. Vikas Bahl, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Balpreet Sidhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant submits that earlier with the consent of the parties, new arbitrator appointed in the year 2007 and the parties did not raise objection in view of Section 16 and thus deemed to have waived his right as per Section 4 of the Act, thus, objection in this regard under Section 34 was not maintainable, much less does not fall within its realm
(3.) Mr. Pankaj Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-UOI submits that he relied upon the provision of Section 21 and Section 85(2) to contend that in case proceedings have been initiated, it is settled law until and unless parties consented for applicability of the rule and thus rightly so, objections have been dealt with and the award has been set aside.;