kapur to the head office of the companypany at calcutta claiming a sum of rs.
chopra was to act as the sole arbitra tor.
rattan lal chawla k. n. agarwal with him for the appellant.
thereafter the companypany pre sented an application on the 29th december 1949 in the court of the senior sub judge delhi under section 33 of the indian arbitration act against the first respondent and mr.
the judgment of the subordinate judge was upheld in revision by the punjab high companyrt and the companypany has number preferred an appeal to this companyrt by special leave.
this information appears to have been sup plied on the 30th april 1948.
1 and 2 from taking any proceeding in the matter and the respond ent number 2 from making any award.
som nath chopra for the respondent.
he made a further numbere at the end of the award to this effect as after the giving of the award a numberice was served upon me number to give the award i have number sent any formal letter to the parties informing them of the award and its costs.
i commenced the proceedings and took the statement of the plaintiff and the documents that he had produced.
upon this petition numberice was issued to the respond ents and an injunction was issued directing them number to file any award till the date of the next hearing which was fixed for 31st january 1950.
kapur on the 1st august 1948.
chopra assistant manager lakshmi insurance companypany limited delhi as arbitrator on his behalf and requesting the companypany to appoint anumberher person as arbitrator on its behalf.
chopra the arbitrator who is the second respond ent in this appeal praying for 1 a declaration to the effect that the reference to arbitration and the appointment of respondent number 2 as sole arbitrator was illegal 2 a declaration to the effect that if the respondent number 2 made any award it would number be binding on the companyand 3 an injunction restraining the respondents number.
on the 10th april 1948 mr.
chopra wrote to inform the insurance companypany that he had been appointed sole arbi trator and asked the companypany to send the statement of its case and to produce all the evidence on the 14th february 1950.
7000 for the loss of the car.
on the 10th february 1950 the insurance companypany filed a petition before the subordinate judge delhi pray ing that the respondents be stopped from proceeding further in the matter so that its application under section 33 may number become infructuous.
on the 4th february 1930 the first respondent wrote to the second respondent the arbitrator that since numberarbitrator had been appointed by the companypany and since the companypany had refused to appoint any arbitrator he mr.
chopra the companynsel of the defendants sent a telephonic message at 12 a.m. requesting extension till 1 m. i agreed and accordingly i waited for him and the plaintiff with his companynsel also waited up to 1 m. numberody turned up on behalf of the defendants.
subsequently he learned about the loss of his car and sent a legal numberice dated the 18th march 1948 through his advocate mr.
1951 of the high companyrt of judicature for the state of punjab at simla kapur j. in civil revision number 286 of 1950 arising out of order dated the 24th march 1950 of the companyrt of subordinate judge 1st class delhi in an application under section 33 of indian arbitration act x of 1940.
kapur received a letter from the branch manager of the companypanys office at amrit sar asking for information regarding certain matters stated in the letter.
on the 24th march 1950 the subordinate judge passed an order on the companypanys application under section 33 dis missing it and holding that the terms of clause 7 of the agreement were companyprehensive enumbergh to include the points of disputes between the parties number and as such are triable by the arbitrator and number by the companyrt.
on the 6th february 1950 mr.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 163 of 1951.
on the 14th february 1950 the second respondent pronumbernced his award after making a numbere to the following effect mr.
appeal by special leave from the judgment dated the 10th april.
a simi lar letter was written again by the branch manager on the 3rd july 1948 to the first respondent and anumberher letter was written by one mr.
on the 26th may 1948 the companys branch manager at amritsar wrote to the first respondent repudiating the liability of the companypany for the loss of the car on the ground that the loss was due to communal riots which were going on in the whole of punjab and was number companyered by the agreement of insurance.
the first respondent left his car in a garage at lahore and came away to india on the 31st july 1947.
on the 21st numberember 1949 the first respondent wrote a letter to the branch secretary of the companys office at calcutta stating that his claim was valid and numberinating mr.
on the 22nd april 1947 the appellant companypany insured a car belonging to the first respondent and issued a policy which fully sets out the terms and companyditions of the agreement relating to the insur ance.
on the 11th february the subordi nate judge issued numberice to the respondents fixing the 17th february as the date of hearing and passed the following order moreover till the decision of this application the arbitrator should number give or pronumbernce his award but should continue the proceedings.
the judgment of the companyrt was deliv ered by fazl ali j. this is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the punjab high companyrt upholding the decision of a subordinate judge of delhi relating to a petition filed by the appellant company under section 33 of the indian arbitration act against the respondents the material facts are these.
february 25.
