Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 2163 2006 SLD 2163 2006 CLC 1060
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No.18 of 2005, decision dated: 16-03-2006.
ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI AND MUHAMMAD ATHAR SAEED, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

KARACHI DOCK LABOUR BOARD

VS

Messrs QUALITY BUILDERS LIMITED

Law:

Section:

Arbitration Act (X of 1940)-------Ss. 5, 8, 9, 11, 20, 30 & 39---High Court appeal---Reappraisal of evidence---Appellate Court, jurisdiction of---Appointment of arbitrator---Failure to raise any objection---On the basis of arbitration clause in the contract between the parties, respondent appointed his arbitrator but appellant did not appoint any arbitrator on his behalf---Arbitrator appointed by respondent issued notices but appellant challenged his jurisdiction to conduct arbitration proceedings---Sole arbitrator after deciding the point of his jurisdiction passed an award which was made rule of the Court---Validity---Appellant was not able to show that he had acted with due diligence because instead of taking steps under Ss.5 & 11 of Arbitration Act, 1940, to approach the Court to cancel the appointment of arbitrator or stay arbitration proceedings, the appellant only attended by sending letters from time to time to the arbitrator agitating the same plea---While entertaining an appeal against order making award, delivered under Arbitration Act, 1940, the rule of the Court, Appellate Court could not sit as a court of appeal against the and decree passed in the suit, therefore, reappraisal of evidence forming another opinion contrary to the material placed on record before the arbitrator was not permissible---Arbitration tribunal was properly constituted and had the jurisdiction to decide the dispute between the parties---Judgment of High Court to the effect that appellant was not able to show in what manner arbitrator misconducted himself and for that matter award was improperly procured, was based on cogent reasons and was unexceptionable--- High Court declined to interfere in the award in High Court Appeal, made rule of the Court---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Abdul Hamid V. H.M. Qureshi PLD 1957 SC 145; Sh. Saleem Ali v. Sh. Akhtar Ali and 7 others PLD 2004 Lah. 404; Muhammad Azam Muhammad Fazil & Co., Karachi v. Messrs N.A. Industries, Karachi PLD 1977 Kar. 21; Board of Trustees of Port of Karachi v. Messrs National Construction Co., (Pakistan) Ltd. and another PLD 1981 Kar. 377; Rizwan Hussain v. The State 1999 SCMR 131; Messrs…
🔒
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