Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 5828 2024 SLD 5828 = 2024 CLC 1876
Peshawar High Court
R.F.A. No.276-P of 2022, decided on 1st June, 2023.
Before S M Attique Shah, J
Javed Akhtar A.A.G. for Appellants. Syed Shahid Shah for
Respondent.

GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA through Secretary Workers and Communication Department, Peshawar and another---Appellants

VERSUS

MUHAMMAD FAYAZ---Respondent

Law: Arbitration Act, 1940

Section: X,14,30,39

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 96

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: IX,158

Arbitration Act (X of 1940)-------Ss. 14, 30 & 39---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.96---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), First Sched., Art.158---Construction contract---Arbitration---Award--Arbitration petition for making the award as rule of the Court---Non-filing of objections by one of the appellants and belated objections toaward by the other appellant---Powers of Civil Court while making award rule of the Court---Scope--Contention of the appellants was that the matters arising out of the award passed by the arbitrator were judicial in nature and not ministerial and mere absence or delay of objections did not absolve the Court from its responsibility to scrutinize it on merits---Validity---Such contention of the appellants was misplaced because although it was held that the objections of one of the appellants were barred by time, yet, while deciding the matter, the Trial Court had fully discussed the material available on record and decided the case on merits---Findings of Trial Court were based on proper appreciation of the material available before it, which did not require any interference---Appellate Court has a very limited jurisdiction while adjudicating an appeal arising out of the Arbitration Act, 1940, as neither it can reappraise the evidence nor can set aside an award merely on the basis of alleged irregularity committed by the Trial Court---For interference with an award and findings of the lower court there must be a patent illegality, which should be apparent on the face of award or the arbitrators have committed misconduct while passing the award which indeed was not the case of the appellants---Appeal was dismissed accordingly.Messrs Awan Industries v. Executive Engineer Lined Channel Division 1992 SCMR 65; Muhammad Tayab v. Akhtar Hussain 1995 SCMR 73 and Qutabuddin Khan v. Chief Mill Wala Dredging Co. 2014 SCMR 1268 ref.National Highway Authority's case 2023 SCMR 1103 rel.Date of hearing: 1st June, 2023.JUDGMENTS M ATTIQUE SHAH, J.---Appellants have filed the instant appeal under section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 read with section 96 of C.P.C. through the Advocate General, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar against the judgments and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register