Section 31(5) – Delivery Modes of Awarddes – WhatsApp group, circulation, acknowledgement & subsequent conduct
By the Arbitration Agreement dated 13.6.2021, it was decided to refer the disputes to arbitration of three Arbitrators.
The impugned Award was passed without filing claims or counter claims of the parties.
On 13.11.2021, the unsigned copy of the impugned Award was posted on WhatsApp group of the parties along with the Arbitral Award.
The petitioner got knowledge of the signed copy of the Award only on receipt of the execution petition of the respondents.
Moreover, the award was signed by two out of three members of the Arbitral Tribunal. No reason for absence of signature of third party is given in the impugned Award.
The petition was filed for execution of the interim award dated 13.11.2021, whereas, objection petition of section 34 petition was filed in January 2024, challenging the said interim award and maintainability of the execution petition.
The principal contention of the Petitioner is that no signed copy of the Award was ever delivered to him in terms of Section 31(5) of the A&C Act and, therefore, the period of limitation never commenced. It has further been contended that the Petitioner became aware of the signed Impugned Award only upon receipt of the Execution Petition filed by the Respondents.
This contention, though attractive at first blush, does not merit acceptance in the peculiar facts of the present case. The material placed on record unmistakably demonstrates that immediately the Award was uploaded in the WhatsApp group created for resolution of the disputes, the Petitioner acknowledged receipt thereof by responding “Noted thanks”. Such acknowledgement was not a mere formal response but was followed by continuous discussions amongst the parties regarding the implementation of the Award.
The conditions regarding execution of the transfer documents but also suggested modifications to the draft deeds. Such conduct unequivocally establishes that the Petitioner had accepted the existence of the Impugned Award and consciously acted upon the same. 32. Even assuming that the Petitioner had not received a signed copy of the Impugned Award, the conduct of the Petitioner assumes considerable significance. Having admittedly become aware of the Impugned Award in November, 2021, the Petitioner neither addressed any communication to the learned Arbitral Tribunal seeking a signed copy of the Impugned Award nor raised any grievance regarding non compliance with Section 31(5) of the A&C Act for nearly two years. The plea regarding non-delivery of the signed Impugned Award surfaced only after the Respondents initiated execution proceedings. Such conduct disentitles the Petitioner from invoking the equitable jurisdiction of this Court.
Tested upon that anvil and in view of the material placed on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Impugned Award was not the outcome of a contested adjudicatory process but was rendered upon the consensus and mutual understanding arrived at between the parties. The Arbitration Agreement itself records the parties’ intention to amicably resolve their inter se disputes through the named Arbitrators, and the material placed before this Court, particularly the contemporaneous WhatsApp exchanges and the conduct of the parties after the passing of the Impugned Award, clearly establishes that the Impugned Award embodied the mutually agreed terms of settlement.
Judgment dated 6.7.2026 of the High Court of Delhi in OMP 3/2024 of Vinay Mawandia Vs. Bimal Mawandia and another with connected matters
