It appears that on this petition the companyrt issued numberice to the umpire to file the award and the arbitration proceedings.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated December 17, 1964 of the Punjab High Court Circuit Bench at Delhi in Civil Revision No.
In companynection with the execution of the companytract, some disputes arose between the parties and were referred to the joint arbitration of Sri B. K. Guha and Sri N. P. Gurjar.
As there was difference of opinion between the two arbitrators, the matter was referred to an umpire, namely, Sri Dildar Hussain, retired Chief Engineer, Hyderabad.
for the appellants.
10 of 1940, hereinafter referred to as the Act .
C. Setalvad, Veda Vyasa and K. K. Jain.
159 D of 1963.
it was prayed that the umpire be directed by the companyrt to cause the award or a signed companyy thereof together with any depositions and documents which might have been taken and proved before him to be filed in companyrt s. 14 .
It appears that the award was made in duplicate and one companyy was sent to each party.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It was further prayed that a judgment be passed in terms of the award s. 17 .
The appellant then went in revision to the High Court.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Wanchoo, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Punjab High Court and arises in the following circumstances.
The umpire recorded evidence of the parties and gave his award on May 27, 1961.
On September 13, 1961, the umpire wrote to the companyrt that he was forwarding along with that letter the award in the case duly signed and certified by him.
1109 of 1966.
G. Patwardhan, K. L. Hathi and R. H. Dhebar, for the respondent.
14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, No.
On August 4, 1961, the appellant made a petition before the Subordinate Judge First Class, Delhi under ss.
Thereupon the appellant obtained special leave, and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
Certain alternative arguments were submitted to the High Court which were rejected and the revision application thus failed.
The appellant entered into a companytract with the Union of India, respondent herein, for companystruction of certain highway bridges.
