UNION OF INDIA Vs. JAGAJIT INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent herein has a telephone connection. It appears that certain dispute arose in respect of the bills submitted by the appellants towards telephone charges. Consequently, the matter was referred to an arbitrator under Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). On 20-8-1992, the arbitrator entered into the reference and on 18th December, 1992, he gave a non-speaking award. This award was challenged by the respondents by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. A Division Bench of the High Court having found that the award does not contain any reason, set aside the award and remitted the matter back to the arbitrator for giving a speaking award. It is against this judgment, the Union of India is in appeal.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants urged that in view of the decision in the case of, M.L. Jaggi v. Mahanagar Telephones Nigam Ltd, (1996) 3 SCC 119, the requirement of giving reasons in the award by the arbitrator has to be applied prospectively and for that reason judgment under appeal deserves to be set aside. In brief, the argument is that a non-speaking award given prior to decision in M. L. Jaggi's case (supra) has to be upheld.

(3.) After having gone through the judgment, we find that the argument of the learned counsel is not based on the correct interpretation of paragraphs 8 and 9 of the said decision. Paragraphs 8 and 9 are reproduced below: