CHOWDHURY AND GULZAR SINGH Vs. FRICK INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two legal questions arise in this case. Whether the award is liable to be set aside when the two arbitrators appointed by the parties fail to appoint an Umpire i.e. they do not comply with clause 2 of First Schedule to the Arbitration Act. In other words, whether clause 2 of First Schedule of the Arbitration Act is mandatory or directory.

(2.) M/s. Chaudhury and Gulzar Singh, petitioners by their letter dated 12th September, 1969 and M/s. Frick India Limited, respondents by their letter dated 6th March, 1970 appointed Shri D. Dutt and Sbri S. L. Nayar as Arbitrators respectively to decide the various disputes amongst themselves. The arbitrators entered upon the reference on 27th May, 1970 and made their award on 19th May, 1972. During the pendency of the arbitration proceedings the petitioners and the respondents jointly made an application under Section 28 of the Arbitration Act for extension of time for the making of the award. In C.M.P. No. 22/72, V. D. Misra J. vide order dated 21st February, 1972 extended the time by a period of 4 months from that date.

(3.) ONE of the test laid down by the Supreme Court to determine whether the provision of statute is mandatory or directory is to find out whether the non-compliance is made penal.