Law: Arbitration Act (X of 1940)

Section: 26-A , 33

  Arbitration Act (X of 1940)--- ---Ss. 26-A & 33---Objection to award -Ignoring a material piece of evidence by Arbitrator--Effect---Matter referred to Arbitrator related to reimbursement of overcharged amount---Arbitrator in his award failed to take note of an important piece of evidential document and thus miscondected the proceedings---Arbitrator was required to give reasons for the award but by ignoring the evidential document produced by plaintiff, his award had been rendered as non-speaking award---Heavier responsibility lies on all domestic forums to deal with all matters going to the root of the dispute and failure to do so would constitute misconduct, because the requirement to give reasons was not a meaningless exercise---Award was set aside in circumstances. K.M. Nadeem for Plaintiff. M. Akram Zuberi for Defendant. Date of hearing: 20th February, 1989. JUDGMENT This Suit is based on an Award dated 10-8-1982, made by Mr. Kashif Murtaza, Deputy Secretary. Ministry of Industries and Mineral Development Department, Government of Punjab, whereby a claim of the Government of Punjab, against their Clearing and Forwarding Agents M/s. Dadabhoy Hormusjee & Sons, has been allowed. 2 The Award in this case is, inter alia, assailed on the ground that the Plaintiffs had been making payments to the Defendant's Clearing Agents at 10% of "C & F" value, on the basis of the mutually acceptable interpretation of the expression "C&F Value" as given in the Note attached to Para 4 of the Contract. However, when the relationship between the parties ended, after having remained in operation from 22-5-1974 to October, 1979, and the Defendants sought to claim their security deposit of Rs. 25,0(X) (Rupees twenty five thousands) the Plaintiffs, in response, claimed that the defendants had over-charged and were liable for reimbursement. As a result, acting on Clause 11 of the Contract the matter was referred to Arbitration and the Arbitrator, even though he observed, that "the Directorate of Industries conceded the point that if the calculation of the commission charges was carried out in accordance with the Note referred to…