Law: Arbitration Act (X of 1940)

Section: 42 & 30

(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Ss. 42 & 30-Arbitrator may convey parties orally the date of hearing, as Arbitration Act (X of 1940), does not prescribe any procedure for proceedings before arbitrator-Notice not sent to party to arbitration by arbitrator-Party having knowledge of proceedings before arbitrator and participating in such proceedings-Award against such party is not ex-parte and thus is valid.(b) Arbitration-Arbitrator is not person conversant with law and trained in legal principles-Arbitrator applying his mind and determining questions involved in dispute-Award is valid�---Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 30.(c) Award-Construction-Award should be construed liberally.A well-settled rule of construction of the award is that the award should be construed liberally and in accordance with common sense and it should be so read that it can be given effect to, and not so that it would nullify the efforts of the arbitrators appointed by the parties themselves. In determining awards the Court cannot lose sight of the fact that arbitrators as a rule are laymen not conversant with the Procedure of Courts of law.(d) Award--- No clear and definite findings-Award should be remitted back to arbitrators for clarification-Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 16.ORDER INAMULLAH, J.--- This is an application under sections 15, 16 and 30 of the Arbitration Act read with section 151, Civil P C. It arises under the following circumstances :- An agreement was arrived at between five persons on 9th December 1952, whereby a certain dispute between the parties was referred to the arbitration of one Mr. Abdul Haq of Friends Trading Company, 289, Campbell Street, Karachi, and Mian Muhammad Abdullah of Mian Brothers, Khori Garden, Karachi. The arbitrators gave their award on 23rd December 1952. The award was filed in Court on 10th December 1955, by one of the arbitrators. Notices were issued to the parties concerned. In pursuance of the notice, the defendants Nos. 1 2 and 3 have filed objections to the award. Mr. Sohail, the learned advocate for the defendants raised the following objections to the award :- (1) The award was not filed by the…