| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3284 = 1981 SLD 3284 = 1981 CLC 1282 |
Court of Special Judge, Karachi
Suit No. 672 of 1976, decided on 27th October, 1980.
Presented By: Nasir Aslam Zahid, J
Shah Jamil Alam and Iqbal Siddiqi for Plaintiff. Abbas Ahmed for Qamarul Islam Abbas for Defendants.
Suit No. 672 of 1976, decided on 27th October, 1980.
Presented By: Nasir Aslam Zahid, J
Shah Jamil Alam and Iqbal Siddiqi for Plaintiff. Abbas Ahmed for Qamarul Islam Abbas for Defendants.
MESSERS SIND CONSTRUCTION Co.--Plaintiff
VERSUS
THE KARACHI PORT TRUST, KARACHI-Defendant
Law: Arbitration Act (X of 1940)
Section: 33, 30
(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940) S. 33 read with S. 30-Objections to award-Grounds of-Plaintiff granted contract for construction of some work by Port Trust basing his claim for escalation on certain Government instructions and memo randa-Question of applicability of such Government instructions and memoranda to plaintiff, held, altogether distinct from question of reasonableness of rates and within scope of arbitration clause in instant case.-.[Award]. Thawardas Pherumal v. Union of India A I R 1955 S C 468; Muhammad Fazil Muhammad Azam & Co. v. Messrs N. A. Industries P L D 1977 Kar. 21 Jaffar Brothers Ltd. v. Pakistan P L D 1978 Kar. 585; Davis Contractor v. Farshan Urban District Council (1956) 2 A E R 145; Abdul Mannan v. Province of N.-W. F. P. P L D 1973 S C 577; WPIDC v. Aziz Qureshi 1973 S C M R 555; Russel on Arbitration, 17th Edn., p. 48 and Ghulam Jillani v. Muhammad Hasan 29 1 A 51 ref. Co-operative Development and Marketing Union Ltd. v. Ganesh Sugar Mils Ltd. A I R 1956 All. 601; Javantilal Keshavlal Dave v. Surandra Gangsa Johrapurkar A I R 1956 Nag. 245 and Alpol Prasad & Sons Ltd. v. Union of India A I R 1960 S C 588 distinguished. (b) Arbitration Act (X of 1940) S. 33 read with S. 30-Obiections to award-Grounds of-Govern ment instructions and memoranda not forming part of agreement --Contract a fixed rate contract without escalation clause but subject to Government approval-Government issuing instructions regarding payment of additional amounts on account of escalation-Plaintiff claiming that Government instructions and memoranda entitled him to additional payment for work done under contract-Held such Government instructions and memoranda "relevant documents" relating to work done under contract and their interpretation and applicability within condition of contract-Arbitrator, held further, authorised to decide whether such instructions and memoranda "relevant documents or not".-[Award]. Ruseel on Arbitration, 17th Edn., p. 48 ref: (c) Arbitration Act (X of 1940) S. 33 read with S.…