- (1.) Being arising out of the award dated 31.3.2011, these three matters are heard and disposed of by this common order.
(2.) Civil Misc. Application No.60/2012 is preferred by M/s Anand Bhatiya Contractor, to challenge the award aforesaid to the extent it do not accept the complete claim of the contractor. The Civil Writ Petition No.8697/2012 is preferred by the Union of India and its officers to challenge the order dated 6.8.2012, passed by learned Additional District Judge No.1, Jodhpur Metropolitan, accepting the application for execution of award dated 31.3.2011. The third one matter is an appeal preferred by Union of India to challenge the order dated 14.3.2012 passed by learned Additional District Judge No.1, Jodhpur Metropolitan, returning the application preferred as per provisions of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') for its proper presentation before the court competent.
(3.) The factual matrix necessary to be noticed to adjudicate these matters is that by an award dated 31.3.2011 the sole arbitrator partly allowed claim of the contractor M/s Anand Bhatiya (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent'). An application, as per provisions of Section 34 of the Act of 1996 was filed by the Union of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') to set aside the arbitral award aforesaid. On receiving the notices, the respondent filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure with assertion that the sole arbitrator in the matter was appointed by the person designated by the Chief Justice, therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 42 of the Act of 1996 the application under Section 34 could have been preferred before the High Court only.;