Law: Arbitration Act, 1940

Section: 34

(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----S. 34---Constitutional petition---Power to stay legal proceedings where there is an arbitration agreement---Scope sought direction to the Authority to release the payment vouchers due to the petitioner under payment certificate---Authority filed an application under S. 34, Arbitration Act, 1940 and contended that any dispute arising out of agreement would in the first place be referred to the Engineer---Validity was entitled for the amount in respect of value of permanent work, which was verified by the Authoritys Engineer---Record revealed that neither any party had issued any notice to initiate the process of arbitration nor raised any dispute in terms of the contract, such aspect demonstrated that both the parties had no dispute to be resolved through arbitration mechanism---Constitutional petition was allowed and the application under S.34 of Arbitration Act, 1940 was dismissed. Muhammad Aslam v. Azad Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir 2005 CLC 1979 ref. Shaman Mal v. Executive Engineer Irrigation 2011 MLD 1644 rel. (b) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----S. 34---Power to stay legal proceedings where there is an arbitration agreement---Scope---Dispute has to be referred in terms of S. 34, Arbitration Act, 1940, by the party, who claims to raise a dispute in a pending matter. (c) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ----S. 34---Power to stay legal proceedings where there is an arbitration agreement---Scope---Dispute does not mean a simple refusal to pay money for which a person is liable. Shin Satellite Public Company Limited v. M/S Kasb Technology Services Limited 2016 YLR 2322 ref. BOC Pakistan Limited v. Natural Gases (Pvt.) Ltd. 2013 CLC 767 rel. JUDGMENT MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE:---.--- Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks direction to be issued to NHA and Member Finance, NHA (Respondents Nos. 1 and 2, respectively) to release the payment vouchers due to the petitioner under payment certificate (I.P.C. No.24) for a net of amount of Rs.130,228,452/-. 2. On the other hand, respondents filed C.M.A. No.233/2018 and C.M.A. No. 3471/2020 under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 seeking…

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