Amit Rawal, J. - (1.) For the reasons stated in the application which is duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed and the delay of 211 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. FAO No.5587 of 2012
(2.) The appellant(s)-Contractor is aggrieved of the impugned order dated 14.10.2011, whereby the objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the 1996 Act') for setting aside the Award dated 20.04.2004 have been dismissed on the ground of limitation, though, there is a passing reference qua merits also.
(3.) Mr. Vijay Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits, that in pursuance to the dispute having arisen between the parties, the matter was referred to the Arbitrator. The matter was contested before the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator pronounced the Award on 20.04.2004. However, the Award does not contain the compliance of the provisions of sub-Section 5 of Section 31 of the 1996 Act. The Award purported to have been enclosed with the letter dated 21st/23rd April, 2004 has not been proved to have been sent as postal receipt has not seen the light of day. The appellant(s)-Contractor applied for a certified copy of the Award vide application dated 19.01.2005 and was supplied by the Arbitrator vide letter dated 27.01.2005 (Ex.P-2). The Objecting Court has only given the reference to the previous letter and formed an opinion by raising the presumption that the Award must have been received.;