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.