Law:

Section:

Arbitration - ("Factory Selection Contract") Arbitration held in accordance with Bye-law 39-1 instead o/' Bye-law 39-11, Pakistan Cotton Association-Party, on request of other party, agreeing by letters to appoint arbitrator on its own behalf in accordance with Bye-law 39-1-Arbitrators and umpire, held, had jurisdiction to arbitrate or give award-Formal agreement in regard to modified procedure in arbitration not necessary-Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 2-[Messrs Faridsons Ltd. v. Messrs S. M, Fazail & Co. P L D 1954 Sind 247 distinguished; Messrs Munawar & Co. v. Messrs S. A. Rauf & Co. P L D 1959 Kar. 325, considered].  JUDGMENT   MASUD AHMAD, J.-These two Letters Patent Appeals (Nos. 69 and 70 of 1959) have arisen out of two agreements entered into between the parties on the 29th December 1950, and the god January 1951, for the sale of 500 bales of cotton. The arbitration clause in the two agreements was to the effect that all disputes, if any, between the parties were to be referred to arbitration under the rules of the Karachi Cotton Association Limited, Karachi, and the arbitration was to be subject to the Bye-laws of that Association. Disputes having arisen between the parties, the appellants. namely, the Valika Textile Mills Ltd. appointed an arbitrator and requested the respondents to appoint the second arbitrator, in accordance with Bye-Law 39 of the Pakistan Cotton Association Limited, Karachi. This request was acceded to by the respondents and they nominated an arbitrator on their behalf. After further exchange of correspondence between the parties, to which we will presently refer, one Mr. Babulal Naraindas, who had been appointed as an umpire, gave an award in favour of the appellants on the 27th September 1954, in respect of the breach of the two contracts. The respon dents filed an application under sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 to challenge the validity of that award and that application was accepted by a Single Judge of this Court on the 12th of November 1959, by means of two separate orders passed on the same date. It is against these orders that these two letters patent appeals have been…