Law: Arbitration Act (X of 1940)

Section: 2(a), 30, 33

Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 91, 92

(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 2(a) read with Evidence Act (I of 1872), Ss. 91 & 92-Arbitration agreement-Only substantive part of agreement, i.e. to refer dispute to arbitration required to be in writing-Agreement may be wholly silent on every other matter concerning arbitration and yet be valid-Sanctity afforded by Ss. 91 & 92, Evidence Act, 1872, to agreements reduced into writing under requirement of law-Does not extend to subsidiary provisions incorporated in arbitration agreement--- Agreement concerning mode or machinery for appointment of arbitrator-Does not enjoy such sanctity-Oral evidence as to consent of parties indicating course different from terms of agree ment, held, admissible in evidence. The petitioner originally entered into a contract for certain constructions with "A" but subsequently consented to do the con tracted job according to the terms of the agreement under "B". The terms of agreement authorised "A" to appoint an arbitrator to settle disputes arising out of the contract. The petitioner on a previous occasion had approached "B" to appoint an arbitrator and had accepted the award given by such arbitrator. Appoint ment of an arbitrator on a subsequent occasion was, however, challenged by the petitioner on the plea that according to the terms of the agreement the right to appoint an arbitrator vested only in "A" and as such "B" could not appoint the arbitrator. The respondent's contention was that the conduct of petitioner in the past indicated a novation of the contract and that parties by consent had agreed to the substitution of "B" for "A". Held, it is true that under the Arbitration Act of 1940, an agreement to refer disputes to arbitration is necessarily to be in writing. This is so in view of the definition of the term, `arbitration agreement' contained in section 2(a) of the said Act as meaning `a written agreement to submit present or future difference to arbitration, whether an arbitrator is named therein or not.' As would clearly appear from a perusal of the foregoing definition, it is only the substantive part of the…