After the arbitration had made some progress, Col.
On February 13, 1950 the companyrt appointed Col.
In that order the companyrt further directed as follows All these cases should be referred to him for arbitration.
Bhandari, but before he moved the companyrt on May 4, 1951 for stay of the proceedings before the arbitrator, the latter had made his awards which were filed in companyrt on that very day.
The respondent applied to the companyrt on March 8, 1951 for review of the order alleging that the office of the Director of Farms, General Headquarters, Simla, had been abolished and as such Brig.
Appeals from the Judgment and Decrees dated the 30th July 1962 of the Allahabad High Court in F.A.F.Os Nos.
After this the District Judge, Meerut, transferred the cases to the Judge of the Small Cause Court, Meerut, presumably on the assumption that the respondents applications for the appointment of an arbitrator were pending.
Ranbir Singh for arbitration.
If the respondents companytention in these A appeals is companyrect that after appointing an arbitrator under section 8 2 the companyrt ceases to have jurisdiction and cannot make an order of reference, the further directions given in the order of February 13, 1950 were invalid.
Ranbir Singh returned the papers to the companyrt on being asked number to proceed further by the Government companynsel who thought that the arbitrator was number companypetent to deal with the questions of law arising for decision.
H. L. Bhandari companyld number be the officer mentioned in the order.
The High Court allowed the appeals accepting the companytention that the companyrt was functus officio after appointing the arbitrator under section 8 2 and had numberjurisdiction to refer the cases to the arbitrator.
220 to 226 of 1952.
If the respondents companytention is right, this was an erroneous assumption, but numberobjection was raised at the time and the Judge of the Small Cause Court by his order dated February 13, 1951 appointed Director of Farms, General Headquarters, Simla, to act as arbitrator in all the seven cases.
ClVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
However, the question did number assume importance at that stage because both sides agreed to submit the disputes to Col.
said to be the officer companycerned.
The review application was ultimately dismissed on May 12, 1951.
He must file his award within one month of this order.
In the applications the respondent named several officers praying that one of them be appointed to act an arbitrator who shall have like power to act in the reference and to make an award as if he has been appointed by the companysent of the parties.
N. Sinha, Solicitor General, G. L. Sanghi, In CA 1284/68 and Girish Chandra, for the Appellants.
L. Bhatia and N. K. Puri, for the Respondent.
During the last world war the respondents a companytractor, entered into seven agreements with the military department of the Government of India for the companystruction of a hospital three other buildings and three tube wells.
In each of these agreements there was a clause providing that any dispute arising between the parties would be referred to an arbitrator.
The papers were then sent to Brigadier H. L. Bhandari who was.
1284 to 1290 of 1968.
The facts leading to the appeals are these.
Against that order the respondent preferred seven appeals to the Allahabad High Court.
Bhandari was number companypetent to act as arbitrator on the basis of the order dated February 13, 1951.
Disputes having arisen between the parties, the respondent made seven applications in the companyrt of the First Civil Judge, Meerut, under section 8 2 of the Act stating that the offices by reference to which the arbitrators were selected in the agreements had been abolished and it was therefore necessary to appoint new arbitrators.
Ranbir Singh whose name was number in the respondents list, to act as arbitrator in all the seven cases and further directed the papers to be sent to him, asking him to give his award within 1001 two months from that date.
The High Court was of the view that it was for the parties to refer their disputes to the arbitrator after he was appointed by the companyrt, and the reference by the companyrt being without jurisdiction the awards were invalid.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GUPTA, J. These seven appeals by certificate have been preferred by the Union of India against a companymon judgment of the Allahabad High Court disposing of seven appeals under section 39 1 vi of the Arbitration Act, 1940.
In four cases the agreements provided for arbitration by the Director of Farms, General Headquarters, Simla, in two cases the officer Commanding, Lucknow, was to be the arbitrator, and in the remaining other case, a Quarter Master at Delhi was chosen as the arbitrator.
The Union of Indra questions the companyrectness of the High Courts decision in these appeals.
