Gujarat High Court Slams Vadodara Municipal Corporation's "Attitude", Refuses To Condone Delay In Filing Arbitration Appeal

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (October 7) dismissed a Section 37 appeal under Arbitration and Conciliation Act filed by Vadodara Municipal Corporation concerning a construction contract dispute, noting that sufficient explanation for condoning delay of 137 days in filing appeal was not given. During the hearing, the court, on being informed that the appeal could not be filed because the then executive engineer was on leave for three months and had also resigned and the new officer was occupied pre-monsoon preparation because of which delay happened, said that this explanation was not to the court's satisfaction. It further orally remarked that this showed, that "approach" and "attitude" of the Corporation that because it is a corporation it will get condonation of delay. The high court was hearing an appeal was presented on 9-7-2025, challenging a commercial court's order.The counsel appearing for the Corporation submitted before Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray that on March 19, the approval was granted by municipal commissioner to file the appeal, however there was some delay which had occurred wherein the earlier executive engineer (who had subsequently resigned), had gone on leave for three months due to medical reasons. On the court's query the counsel said that the new executive engineer who had joined was overseeing the preparation of filing potholes on bridges in June and hence there was again some delay in that month for processing of the appeal. The court was told that the appeal draft was prepared on 3-6-2025, and on 24-6-2025 the executive engineer affirmed it and on 30-6-2025 drafts were shared back and thereafter the appeal was filed in July. The court at this stage orally said, "This is a section 37 appeal. It is not a writ court not 227 not 226. This kind of explanation is not acceptable...This is not about anything else, this is about approach, the attitude. Because you are Corporation, attitude is you will get condonation. This is Section 37". The court asked about the year of the arbitral award pertaining to dispute over construction of a bridge. When told that the award was passed in 2017, the court asked the counsel as to why was the appellant not paying the contractor when the award was against the appellant when the work had been completed on 3-10-2012. The court thereafter in its order dictated, "This is a misconceived appeal filed under Section 37 by Vadodara Municipal Corporation with delay of 137 days, explanation of which is not to the satisfaction of the court...A perusal of application for condonation of delay indicates that casual statement has been made in the affidavit of the executive engineer (bridge project) authorized officer of appellant corporation about delay in processing the matter for filing the present appeal. In one of the paragraphs of application while explaining delay states that matter could not be processed on account of taking leave taken by then executive engineer for 3 months–March, April, May 2025. The then executive engineer had submitted his resignation and when the new incumbent had joined, the file was located and sent to the legal department". The court said, "there is a delay of approximately of 3 months after necessary approval granted by municipal commissioner on 19-3-2025 is not to satisfaction of the court...some explanation is sought to be given about for the period between 3-6-2025 and 24-6-2025 because of the engagement in some administrative work of the corporation which cannot be accepted as sufficient explanation for delay in filing appeal". The court said, "appellant has utterly failed in giving a reasonable explanation much less sufficient explanation for delay of 137 days". The court also noted that the award is of 2017 and the claim of the contractor is pertaining to the final bills awarded by the arbitrator are of the year 2012. "About 13 years have passed since contractor has not been able to receive payments even after completion of the work on 3-1-2012," the court said.The court noted that while rejecting the section 34 petition the commercial court had categorically recorded that none of the findings of the arbitrator appear to patently illegal. The appeal was dismissed on ground of delay noting that it remains unexplained to the court's satisfaction. Case title: VADODARA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION V/S RANJIT BUILDCON LTDR/CA/4626/2025 IN F/FA/21909/2025 Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 163Click Here To Read/Download Order

Gujarat High Court Slams Vadodara Municipal Corporation's "Attitude", Refuses To Condone Delay In Filing Arbitration Appeal

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags