SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA Vs. ANIL KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) --

(2.) VIDE letter dated 12/06/1988, thesola arbitrator, Mr. Justice Jaswant Singh (retired Judge,Supreme Court) had sent the award dated 8/06/1988 alongwith the proceedings to this Court. Notice of filing of the awardwas issued to all the partics and all the parties have filed objectionpetitions which are now being' disposed of by this judgment.

(3.) IN a recent judgment the five Judges Bench of theSupreme Court in Raipur Development Authority v. M/s Chokhamal Contractors, AIR 1990 SC 1426(7) has held that it isnot the requirement of law that the arbitrator must give reasonsin support, of his findings and the award isi not liable to beremitted or set aside on the ground that the aribtrator has notgiven reasons in support of this findings. Giving of reasons isnot a principle of any rule of natural justices which has to becomplied' with by the arbitrator. IN M/s Hind Builders v.Union of INdia, AIR 1990 SC. 1340. (8) the Supreme Courthas again reiterated the law that in case there are two viewspossible in respect of certain clauses of the contract and thatthe arbitrator acting upon a particular interpretation, the courthas no jurisdiction to interfere with the view of the arbitrator.As laid down in Dandaai Sahu v. State of Orissa, AIR 1990SC 1128. (9) the arbitrator is only required to mention in theaward that he has referred to and considered all the documents and evidence before him, no matter whether he relies onthem or ultimately discards them from consideration.