AKBAR HUSSAIN Versus MUHAMMAD TAYYAB

ORDER

1. It is 12 noon now. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that objections are liable to be dismissed for having been filed beyond time. The notice of Award filed on 2nd of January, 1988 was issued on 6th January, 1988 for appearance of the parties for filing of application under section 15, 16 or 30, as the case may be, of the Arbitration Act, 1940, on or before Ist February, 1988.The service was held good on 1st February, 1988. The Registrar allowed time to file objections, if any, by Ist March, 1988. The defendant presented an application under section 148 Cr.P.C. for enlargement of time by two weeks which was allowed by the Registrar on Ist March, 1988. Case was then adjourned to 21st March, 1988. The defendant filed objections to the Award on 21st March, 1988 A which are patently out of time. No application for condonation of delay or enlargement of time has been made alongwith objections filed on behalf of the defendant.

2. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, objections are overruled as time-barred.

3. At this stage, Mr. Mumtaz Ahmad Shaikh, Advocate for the defendant appears. It may be noted that he had not sent any intimation that he was busy before another Bench. There is yet another Award given in J.M.No.39/86 by the same Arbitator who has given the Award in the case in hand and that he has tiled objections in that case also against the Award and that case is fixed today before my learned brother Syed Abdul Rehman, J. The learned counsel, however, was unable to make any submission with regard to the objections filed in this case beyond time. I have already held that merits of the case cannot be taken into consideration at this stage when the objections filed on behalf of the defendant are time-barred. Even now the counsel could not show any sufficient cause for not filing the objections in time.

4. The Award is made the rule of the Court.

5. M.Y.H./A-612/K

6. Award made rule of Court.