9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned judgment, the learned Judge dismissed the O.P. filed by the Bank and decreed the suit filed by Sri Pandit Rao. Being aggrieved, the bank has filed the above revision and appeal. For convenience sake, the parties will be referred to by their status in the appeal. 3. The parties had entered into two separate agreements on 21-1-1980 and 29-5-1980 respectively for demolition of existing structure of the appellant-bank premises and for construction of a new building. Disputes and differences arose between the parties. It is not in dispute that there existed an arbitration clause in the agreement. One Sri P.V. Amarnath Prasad was appointed as an arbitrator. The arbitrator adjudicated the dispute and adduced both oral and documentary evidence and when he was about to pass an award, the first respondent herein raised an objection to the effect that the arbitrator was one of the official valuers of the appellant-bank and he should not be permitted to pass an award. Accordingly, he filed an application for removal of the arbitrator. Thereafter, one Sri K.C.S. Rao was appointed as an arbitrator. According to the appellant, the said arbitrator, instead of starting the process o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction [1994] (2) ARB LRR 7 and Indian Iron Steel Co. Ltd. v. Sutna Stone Lime Co. Ltd. AIR 1991 Cal. 3. 6. Secondly, the learned counsel would contend that the award was passed in undue haste which itself prove malice on the part of the arbitrator. Attention of the Court has also been drawn to a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in W.A. No. 1123 of 1984 wherein the appeal filed by the first respondent in respect of a connected proceeding was dismissed on 24-4-1989. Attention in this connection has been drawn to a letter dated 20-7-1993 wherein the arbitrator recorded : All the documents in possession of Shri P.V. Amarnath Prasad, former Arbitrator have now been received by me. Before proceeding to finalize the case based on documents received, I would like hear from both the parties, with a view to get myself completely updated. 7. The learned counsel would submit that however on 7-11-1993 a direction was issued although all documents were not produced before him. The learned counsel would contend that some suits are pending between the parties and as such the learned arbitrator could not have proceeded in the matter. In support of the above contention, rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned arbitrator except representing the matter through his junior counsel whose presence is noted by the learned arbitrator. It is also noted by the learned arbitrator that he heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. It was submitted that had the arbitrator been biased in favour of the respondent, he would have upheld all the claims. It was pointed out that two claims of the first respondent had been rejected. The learned counsel would further contend that full opportunity was granted to the parties who represented their respective versions and their respective counsel represented the parties. 9. The learned trial Judge formulated the following two questions for consideration : In the suit O.S. 12 of 1994 the point that arise for consideration is whether the plaintiff in O.S. No. 12 of 1994 is entitled for the relief of making the award dated 26-11-1993 a rule of the Court. In the O.P. 5 of 1994 the point for consideration is : Whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief to set aside the award passed by the learned arbitrator dated 26-11-1993 declaring it as illegal null and void, untenable and non-executable. 10. The learned t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the dispute had arisen. It was made very clear that no further adjournment would be allowed but the proceedings started on 6-11-1993 could be continued for the next day 7-11-1993 also. Shri J. Radha Krishna Murthy had once again brought out the issues under dispute. Sri G. Sudharshan had pleaded for adjournment and accordingly the proceedings were continued on 7-11-1993 when his senior colleague Shri M. Sreedhara Murthy was present. Shri M. Sreedhara Murthy having heard the issues under dispute pleaded his case. After hearing both the sides the undersigned concluded the hearing.... 12. The submission of Sri Bhattacharya to the effect that the statement made in paragraph 2 of the above proceedings of the arbitrator is not correct cannot be accepted as no affidavit of the counsel contrary thereto had been filed. From the letter dated 20-7-1993 of the arbitrator, it appears that the said arbitrator had received all the documents in possession of the former arbitrator. He had, therefore, directed the parties to appear before him with a view to get himself completely updated. Further, from the letter dated 15-4-1993 addressed by Sri Amarnath Prasad to Sri K.C.S. Rao, it appears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l justice ? The answer to the same must be held in negative. 14. In Hindustan Paper Corporation Ltd. s case ( supra ), a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court observed : We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Advocates appearing for both the parties and also the relevant papers and the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court. It appears that the Joint Arbitrators met at Calcutta on 19-2-1990 and the said fact was known to both the parties. One of the arbitrators was the General Manager, who is now working with the appellant. The parties never raised any point nor approached the Arbitrators that they wanted to argue the matter, but as a matter of fact the appellant in their notes have made written submissions about the merits and prayed that the claim should be rejected. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the parties took the full opportunity to place their case and never wanted a further hearing and, as such, it cannot be said that the Joint Arbitrators hastily closed the proceeding and has acted beyond the principles of natural justice and/or misconducted themselves in the proceeding in any way whatsoever. The said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he jurors was an employee of that organization though working at a different branch. In quashing the conviction the court held that the Judge when asked to discharge the juror had not gone into the question of the appearance of bias. It is difficult to discover any basis on which these two lines of authority can live together. Mr. Moran has submitted that a distinction can be drawn between the test to be applied in jury cases and that which is appropriate for magistrates courts or other inferior Tribunals entrusted with fact finding responsibilities. We feel we must accept this distinction because there is no other way of reconciling most of the authorities, though it is difficult to understand why the test of bias should be any different in considering the position of a magistrate compared with that of juror. The only case which cannot be fitted into this dichotomy is the one last cited. namely Reg v. Morris (orse Williams), in which giving the judgment of the court 1 applied the Topping test [1983] 1 WLR 119 to the position of a juror. The decision in Reg v. Morris (orse Williams), 93 Cr. App. R. 102 cannot stand with that of the five judge court in Reg v. Box [196 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
