Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 1366 1996 SLD 1366 1996 CLC 503
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 357 of 1992, decision dated: 26-10-1995, hearing DATE : 17-10-1995
MUHAMMAD, JAFFAR HASHMI, J
Bashir Ahmad Ansari for Petitioner. Syed Qalb-i-Hassan and Mirza Anwar Beg for
Respondents

Raja ALLAH DITTA

VS

MUHAMMAD GHAFFAR and 2 others

Law:

Section:

Arbitration Act (X of 1940)-------Ss. 2(a), 3 & para. 2 of First Sched.---Arbitration agreement ---Umpire--­Appointment of---Arbitration agreement according to which parties voluntarily opted to refer their dispute to arbitration of their own choice, was duly executed in writing between the parties and arbitrators were appointed who announced their award in pursuance of reference agreement---Plaintiff who though intentionally suppressed important matter of appointment of arbitrators and their award, but neither in his plaint nor in evidence had challenged reference agreement nor award of arbitrators---Existence of arbitration agreement between parties, thus, could not be denied by plaintiff---Award given by arbitrators being unanimous or at least being a majority award, appointment of umpire, was not necessary, because wisdom behind scheme of appointment of umpire was that in case of difference of opinion between two sets of arbitrators who were even in number, award would be invalid for being no executable and to avoid such situation, appointment of an umpire would become a statutory obligation--­Unanimous or at least majority award given by arbitrators, thus suffered from no illegality and was valid award and parties who voluntarily opted to refer their dispute to arbitrators of their own choice, were bound by award given by those arbitrators. PLD 1952 Pesh. 23; AIR 1970 SC 833; AIR 1961 SC 1077; PLD 1971 SC 516; AIR 1979 Bom. 149; PLD 1976 Kar. 961; PLD 1987 SC 107; PLD 1974 SC 61; AIR 1962 Mys. 135 and PLD 1954 Sindh 241 ref. JUDGMENT Facts giving rise to this revision petition briefly stated are that petitioner/plaintiff instituted a civil suit, for issuance of a decree for permanent injunction restraining respondents/defendants from interfering with construction work of plaintiff's market and as well with the construction of Parda-wall owned by the plaintiff, in the Court of Civil Judge, Rawalpindi. 2. It was averred by the plaintiff that he purchased house property No.C/49 situated in Moti Bazar, Rawalpindi and sometime after he decided to demolish the house and instead construct a small market comprising of shops for which purpose he got…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492