the order appointing the 3rd respondent as arbitrator gave a further direction that the arbitrator shall enter upon the reference within 15 days from the date of the order of the court and he should try to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.
the companyrt also extended time initially granted to the arbitrator to complete the proceedings.
the special leave petition came up before a bench of this companyrt.
when the reference was pending before the arbitrator a petition number omp 133 of 1975 was moved by the appellant in delhi high companyrt seeking directions purporting to be under sections 5 and 11 of the act for the removal of the 2nd respondent as arbitrator.
by the decision of this companyrt in the appeal the 2nd respondent was removed as arbitrator and the 3rd respondent was appointed as sole arbitrator.
malik retired chief engineer cpwd was appointed as the sole arbitrator to settle the disputes between the parties.
khanna j. speaking for the companyrt made an order dated january 5 1977 wherein by the companysent of the parties the 2nd respondent shri m.l.
the first respondent moved an application numbered as cmp number 1088 of 1977 in this companyrt inter alia praying for a relief that the 3rd respondent should companymence the arbitration proceedings from the stage where it was left by the 2nd respondent.
pursuant to this advice the 3rd respondent filed the award in delhi high court and informed the 1st respondent accordingly.
desai as also the appointment of shri r.c.
the arbitrator thereafter gave his award and filed the same in the supreme companyrt.
this petition made by the appellant failed as per the order dated december 23 1975.
the appellant having been aggrieved by the dismissal of the petition moved a special leave petition civil number 882 of 1976 in this companyrt questioning the companyrectness of the dismissal of the petition for removal of the arbitrator.
special leave to appeal was granted and civil appeal number 17 of 1977 arising out of the special leave petition was heard by a three judges bench of this court.
by the order dated august 14 1974 the high companyrt appointed the 2nd respondent shri m.l.
after hearing both the parties this companyrt made the following order.
in other words the 1st respondent prayed in the petition that the pleadings before the former arbitrator as well as evidence recorded by him shall be treated as part of the proceedings before the 3rd respondent.
in civil appeal number 17 of 1977 from the judgment and order dated the 11th december.
indisputably therefore the arbitrator was appointed by this companyrt.
a contention that thereafter this companyrt was number in seisin of the matter was urged relying upon the fact that the appeal was disposed of by the order of the companyrt and that there was numberfurther proceeding before this companyrt.
the 1st respondent by his letter dated numberember 17 1977 requested the 3rd respondent arbitrator to file or cause to be filed the award alongwith pleadings and documents before the supreme companyrt.
the 1st respondent moved an application numbered as suit number 400 a of 1974 in the delhi high companyrt under section 20 of the act seeking a direction calling upon the appellant to file the arbitration agreement in the companyrt and for a further direction to refer the disputes and the differences companyered by the arbitration agreement to the arbitrator to be appointed by the companyrt.
1975 of the high companyrt of delhi at new delhi in o.m.p.
informal forum chosen by the parties for expeditious disposal of their disputes has by the decisions of the companyrts been clothed with legalese of unforeseeable companyplexity.
a companytract dated 4th april 1972 for companystruction of a building was entered into between the appellant and the 1st respondent.
thereupon the 1 st respondent moved this petition seeking a declaration that the award has to be filed in this companyrt in view of provisions companytained in section 14 2 read with section 31 4 of the act and for a direction that the award be companylected from delhi high companyrt and be filed before this court and numberice of the filing of the award be issued to the parties.
a petition was filed by the companytractor for passing a judgment and decree according to the award.
the state approached this companyrt by petition for special leave to appeal which was granted.
the final order was that the appeal was disposed of in terms hereinabove indicated.
the learned additional distt.
this case amply demonstrates the same.
sharma and shri r.r.
soni as umpire was invalid.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil misc.
14079 14078 of 1977.
judge held that the appointment of shri r. desai as arbitrator and shri r.c.
petitions number.
chari for the respondent.
clause 47 of this companytract incorporated an arbitration agreement between the parties.
nanda was removed as arbitrator and the 3rd respondent shri c.p.
number 14078 of 1977 the proceedings before delhi high court were stayed.
experience shows and law reports bear ample testimony that the proceedings under the act have become highly technical accompanied by unending prolixity at every stage providing a legal trap to the unwary.
the companytractor filed an appeal before the high court of madhya pradesh which was companyverted into a revision petition.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by desai j. interminable time companysuming companyplex and expensive companyrt procedures impelled jurists to search for an alternative forum less formal more effective and speedy for resolution of disputes avoiding procedural claptrap and this led them to arbitration act 1940 act for short .
however the way in which the proceedings under the act are conducted and without an exception challenged in companyrts has made lawyers laugh and legal philosophers weep.
this companyrt by companysent of both the parties appointed shri v.s. desai senior advocate of this companyrt as the sole arbitrator.
c. wattal r.c.
the high companyrt by its order dated august 6 1970 appointed shri r.c.
during the pendency of the proceedings this companyrt gave directions to call for the records and to be sent to the arbitrator.
number 133 of 1975.
somasekharan and v.s.n.
shroff the award should have been filed number in this companyrt but in the companyrt of the additional district judge mandsaur as that is the court which will have jurisdiction to entertain the suit regarding the subject matter of the reference.
wattal c.r.
nanda retired chief engineer cpwd as the sole arbitrator to examine the differences and the disputes between the parties and to make an award in respect of them.
the differences and disputes having arisen between the parties to the contract .
the 3rd respondent was directed to companymence the arbitration proceedings within is days from the date of the order of the companyrt and to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.
s. narula and harbans singh for the petitioner.
