for recovery of a sum of Rs.57,53,064.65 along with interest. In these arbitration proceedings, it has been found as a matter of fact on record by the court below that the appellants/petitioners were duly served but the appellants/petitioners failed to appear in the arbitration proceedings. The court below has arrived at a finding that notices which were sent to the appellants/petitioners by the registered post were at the admitted addresses of the appellants/petitioners, and therefore, there is deemed service of the arbitration proceedings. The court below has also referred to the fact that even the earlier recall-cum-demand notice dated 30.8.2013 sent to the appellants/petitioners, the same was received back with a note of ‘refusal’. The court below also notes that addresses of the appellants/petitioners mentioned in the postal envelopes, whether the addresses were those as mentioned in the demand notice or notices issued in the arbitration proceedings including the notice to proceed ex-parte , are the same addresses of the appellants/petitioners as mentioned in their petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. More importantly, the court below has come to a finding of fact that the Award dated 20.12.2013 was sent to the appellants/petitioners by way of registered post and the appellants/petitioners were duly served of the Award on 28.12.2013 as there were found two AD cards bearing the stamp of the appellant no.1/petitioner no.1 and the signatures of two other persons on the AD cards, lying in the arbitral record. The court below has held that the appellants/petitioners have not denied the official stamp of the appellant no.1/petitioner no.1 or the signatures on the AD cards. The aforesaid aspects have been dealt with exhaustively by the court below in paras 6 to 8 of the impugned judgment and which paras read as under:-
