Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 220 of 2007
PETITIONER:
D. GOPINATHAN PILLAI .....APPELLANT(S)
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA & ANR. ....RESPONDENT(S)
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/01/2007
BENCH:
Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN & ALTAMAS KABIR
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 8077/2006)
Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN, J.
Leave granted.
Heard Mr.T.L.V.Iyer, learned senior counsel for the appellant and
Mr.R.Sathish, learned counsel for the respondents.
This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned
Single Judge of the High Court dt.13.12.2005 in C.R.P.No.1177 of 2005.
Before the High Court, it was submitted by the appellant herein
(D.Gopinathan Pillai) that the delay in filing an application for setting
aside the award was only 30 days and there was absolutely no
explanation for the inordinate delay of 3320 days in filing the appeal.
The High Court without going into the merits of the delay petition has,
however, observed that the application to set aside the award is
ultimately dismissed then the appellant cannot be said to be aggrieved
and that if the said petition is ultimately allowed and the arbitral award
passed in favour of the appellant is set aside then his remedy is to file
an appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and that the
appellant can challenge the impugned order in that appeal, in case, the
petition to set aside the award happened to be decided against the
appellant. Reserving the said right to the appellant, the Civil Revision
Petition was dismissed by the High Court.
Our attention was also drawn to the order passed by the
Principal Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram dt.30.09.2005 in
I.A.No.1309/2005 in O.P.(Arb.) 78/1995 which was filed by the State of
Kerala against the appellant herein. The court has considered whether
the delay of 3320 days in filing the petition to set aside the award can be
condoned. We have perused the entire order. However, without
assigning any acceptable reason, Principal Sub Judge,
Thiruvananthapuram has condoned the inordinate delay of 3320 days
and allowed the I.A. filed by the State of Kerala. While condoning the
delay, the learned Sub Judge has also observed that the officers of the
State of Kerala has committed gross negligence in not filing the
objection for a long period of 3320 days and, therefore, for the fault of
the officers, the State should not be penalised.
We are unable to countenance the finding rendered by the Sub
Judge and also the view taken by the High Court. There is no dispute in
regard to the delay of 3320 days in filing the petition for setting aside the
award. When a mandatory provision is not complied with and when the
delay is not properly, satisfactorily and convincingly explained, the
court cannot condone the delay, only on the sympathetic ground. The
orders passed by the learned Sub Judge and also by the High Court are
far from satisfactory. No reason whatsoever has been given to condone
the inordinate delay of 3320 days. It is well-considered principle of law
that the delay cannot be condoned without assigning any reasonable,
satisfactory, sufficient and proper reason. Both the courts have
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
miserably filed to comply and follow the principle laid down by this
Court in catena of cases. We, therefore, have no other option except to
set aside the order passed by the Sub-Judge and as affirmed by the
High Court. We accordingly set aside both the orders and allow this
appeal.
No costs.