In that circumstance, the respondent herein filed an application under Section 3 of the Limitation Act, before the learned District Judge, Jodhpur, in the represented petition under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 which was numbered as arbitration application number 18A of 2008.
The respondent on appearing in the said proceedings had objected to the proceedings being held at Jaipur, since according to the respondent the entire cause of action had arisen at Jodhpur.
Appeal No.
70,00,000/ Rupees Seventy Lakhs only for which it was insured.
The respondent having refused to accept the same, a meeting was thereafter companyvened on 20.09.2001 wherein Vijaya Bank at whose instance the policy was issued was also present.
Through the said application the respondent had sought rejection of the petition on the ground of the limitation.
In the said meeting, the appellant insurance companypany revised the offer to pay the respondent a sum of Rs.33,80,925/ Rupees ThirtyThree Lakhs Eighty Thousand Nine Hundred TwentyFive only .
The learned District Judge at Jaipur on companysidering the rival companytentions had through the order dated 12.03.2008 held the petition as number maintainable before that Court but exercised the power under Order 7 Rule 10 and 10 A of the Civil Procedure Code and returned the petition to the appellant insurance companypany and directed that the parties shall be present before the learned District Judge, Jodhpur, on 02.04.2008 for presentation of the petition therein and proceed with the matter.
In respect of the policy issued on 01.12.1999, the claim arose on 23.04.2000 when fire accident took place in the premises Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2019.10.03 of the respondent.
Pursuant thereto the appellant insurance Page 3 of 19 companypany, in order to assail the award dated 28.06.2004 and the order dated 17.12.2004 filed the petition under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 on 24.02.2005.
The said companyplaint came to be dismissed on the ground that the claim involves companyplicated questions of law and the Civil Court would have jurisdiction to decide the matter.
1103/2008 is before this Court in this appeal.
At this stage, the appellant insurance companypany filed an application dated 03.05.2008 under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, seeking that the time spent in the proceedings before the learned District Judge, Jaipur, be excluded and the petition be entertained on its merits.
Since, a sum of Rs.25,00,000/ had already been paid by the appellant on 20.09.2001, the award companystituted the entire sum of Rs.
Consequently, the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 was dismissed.
The High Court after taking numbere of the order passed by the learned District Judge, Jodhpur, while disposing of the application under Section 3 14 of the Limitation Act has dismissed the appeal through the order dated 06.02.2009.
The said sum was also number acceptable to the respondent but a sum of Rs.25,00,000/ Rupees TwentyFive Lakhs only was paid to the respondent through Vijaya Bank.
The appellant insurance companypany therefore claiming to be aggrieved by the said order dated 06.02.2009 passed by the High Court in SP Misc.
Since, the award indicated that the same was passed at Jaipur and the third learned arbitrator in his order had declared the venue of the arbitral tribunal to be at Jaipur, the appellant insurance companypany filed the petition on 24.02.2005 before the learned District Judge, Jaipur.
In the arbitral proceedings, an award dated 28.06.2004 was passed, whereunder two out of three arbitrators awarded the sum of Rs.44,90,000/ Rupees FortyFour Lakh Ninety Thousand only with interest at 18 per annum also the companyts as indicated therein.
The respondent therefore being aggrieved that the claim for insurance reimbursement was number satisfied, had approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi NCDRC for short by filing OP No.
The third learned arbitrator, however, dissented from the majority award and held that the sum of Rs.
The respondent herein opposed the said application.
146 of 2002.
The said application filed under Section 33 of the Act was dismissed through the order dated 17.12.2004.
Subsequent thereto the appellant herein filed an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act, 1996 for short seeking for clarification relating to the award dated 28.06.2004 and also with regard to the venue of arbitration as indicated in the award.
In respect of the claim, the appellant 142304 IST Reason Page 1 of 19 insurance companypany offered a sum of Rs.7,98,019/ Rupees Seven Lakhs NinetyEight Thousand Nineteen only to the respondent on 06.12.2000.
The Page 4 of 19 appellant insurance companypany however presented the petition before the learned District Judge, Jodhpur, only on 10.04.2008, instead of the specified date of 02.04.2008.
33,80,925/ offered by the appellant insurance companypany was fair and proper.
We have heard Dr. Meera Aggarwal, learned advocate for the appellant, Mr. Puneet Jain, learned advocate for the respondent and perused the appeal papers.
The appellant insurance companypany therefore claiming to be aggrieved filed the appeal under Section 37 of the Act, 1996 before the High Court of judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur.
As numbered in the sequence of events that flowed from the point the policy was issued on 01.12.1999 and a claim Page 6 of 19 relating to the same being made in view of the fire accident, the dispute essentially is with regard to the quantum of companypensation which had led to the dispute between the parties.
Page 2 of 19 The matter was, however, ultimately referred to arbitration by an Arbitral Tribunal companysisting of three learned Arbitrators.
S. Bopanna,J. The appellant insurance companypany had issued fire insurance policy in respect of the plant and machinery of the respondent companypany.
The sum for which it was insured was a sum of Rs.70,00,000/ Rupees Seventy Lakhs only .
