P C AGGARWAL Vs. BANWARI LAL KOTTYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) WHILE dealing with this first appeal against order, the learned Single Judge (P.N. KhannaJ.) did not decide the question about the competency of a unilateral reference. He considered that,-

(3.) THE question is whether the view of the Supreme Court quoted earlier beginning with the words "a reference requires the assent. . . ." and ending with the words "the arbitrator is not vested with the necessary exclusive jurisdiction" are with respect to all arbitrations or with respect to an arbitration only with reference to a question of law. THE Supreme Court has stated in the earlier part of their judgment that "'these bricks were not the subject-matter of the contract but the contractor put his claim in this way", the reference being to unburnt bricks. That being so, the claim with respect to the unburnt bricks would not arise out of the contract and would not, therefore, be referable under clause 14 thereof which contained the arbitration clause. THErefore. a question of law in relation to the claim with respect to these unburnt bricks would also not arise out of the contract and would not be referable under the aforesaid clause 14. In these circumstances, there would be no question of making any application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act because that section pre-supposes the existence of an arbitration agreement. A Court will not have any jurisdiction to entertain an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act without the existence of an arbitration agreement and will not be entitled to make a reference to an arbitrator. It, therefore, follows that the above quoted observation of the Supreme Court requiring recourse to section 20 of the Arbitration Act could not have been made with reference only to the question of law raised in the appeal. THEre does not appear to be any doubt that this quotation is a general quotatation which covers cases not only of reference of a question of law to arbitration but of all references to arbitration. THE last paragraph in the said quotation is only an application of the general observation in the two previous paragraphs to the question of law which was sought to be raised in that case.