The Supreme Court of India in the case of Benarsi Krishna Committee v. Karmyogi Shelters Pvt. Ltd1 has held that it is not sufficient for the Arbitrator/s to only serve the Award only upon the Advocates but also compulsorily serve upon the parties to the arbitral proceedings.
Whilst analyzing Section 31 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (the "Act"), the Supreme Court relied on its decision in Union of India (UOI) v. TeccoTrichy Engineers and Contractor where it was held that the meaning of "party to an arbitration agreement" as provided in Section 2 (1)(h) and Section 34 (3) would mean "in the large organizations like Railways, "party" as referred to in Section 2(h) read with Section 34(3) of the Act has to be construed to be a person directly connected with and involved in the proceedings and who is in control of the proceedings before the Arbitrator."2
The effect of this decision is that the Section 34 application under the said Act for setting aside the award is to be taken within the prescribed date of limitation as provided under the Act from the date of service of the award upon the party.
Footnotes
1. JT 2012 (9) SC 111
2. AIR 2005 SC 1832
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.