Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 2399 2001 SLD 2399 2001 CLC 613
Lahore High Court
Regular First Appeal No. 642 of 1999, decision dated: 21st November, 2000, hearing DATE : 30-10-2000
AMIR ALAM KHAN AND SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Ijaz Ahmad Ch., Addl. A.G. with Ch. ashir Ahmad,Asstt. A.G. for Appellants. Ch. Arshad Mahmood for
Respondents Nos. 1, 2, 9 to 13, 15 to 20 and 22 to 24

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through COLLECTOR JHANG and 2 others

VS

Messrs SHER MUHAMMAD & CO. and 23 others7.

Law:

Section:

(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)------S. 39(1)(vi)---Appeal---Maintainability---Objections to set aside award rejected by Trial Court---Effect---Where objections have been rejected, the order falls within the scope of S.39(1)(vi) of Arbitration Act, 1940, and appeal is maintainable. (b) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----S. 39---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.105---Appeal---Arbitrator, appointment of---Such appointment was by interlocutory/intermediary order, and the same was the subject-matter of appeal against final order ---Validity--­On filing of appeal against the ultimate decision of the Court below, the whole matter gets reopened and the legality and propriety of any adverse interim order can also be examined by the Court of appeal---Order appointing the arbitrators by the Trial Court can be challenged before the Court of appeal, when filed against a final order or decree in view of S.105, C.P.C.---Appeal was maintainable in circumstances. Shah Jahan v. Inayat Shah and others AIR 1919 Lah. 38; Divisional Superintendent, P.W.R., Lahore v. Muhammad Naseer-ud-Din PLD 1972 Lah. 301; Mst. Khurshid Begum v. Ahmad Bakhsh and another PLD 1985 SC 405 and Sewa v. Mst. Santi and others 1992 SCMR 1306 rel. (c) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----Ss. 21 & 39---Arbitration---Appointment of arbitrator, without the consent of all the parties---Joining of arbitration proceedings by non-consenting party---Effect---During pendency of suit one of the parties applied for appointment of arbitrator, Trial Court without the consent of all the parties appointed arbitrator and made award rule of the Court ---Although there was arbitration clause in the agreement, yet none of the parties resorted to that clause of the agreement prior to the filing of the suit ---Validity--­Arbitration in suit pending before a Court, could only be possible under S.21 of Arbitration Act, 1940, by agreement of all the parties and not at the choice or option of one party---Despite the objection by one of the parties, Trial Court proceeded to refer the matter to arbitrators which was not permissible as the Court had no such power in view of S.21 of Arbitration Act; 1940---Order of reference to…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492