STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. PHOOL CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One of the main purposes for arbitration is to have quick disposal of cases, by doing away with the strict procedural laws. It was intended to be a fast track system. Yet we have a case before us, which has a unique and chequered history, as it has been in the Courts for nearly 25 years!

(2.) An agreement dtd. 22/3/1985 was executed between the contractor i.e. M/s. Phool Chandra and the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh, for civil and engineering work. Later a dispute arose between the parties and the matter was referred for arbitration, as per the terms of the Arbitration clause which was a part of the contract. The Arbitrator gave its award on 29/8/1994. Thereafter, an application to set aside the award was moved by the State of Uttar Pradesh under Ss. 30/33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, which was dismissed by the court vide judgment and order dtd. 10/5/1996 and the award was made Rule of Court.

(3.) The State of U.P. challenged the order dtd. 10/5/1996 in an appeal under Sec. 39 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the year 1997, where it remained pending, and later after creation of the State of Uttarakhand, (which was carved out from the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh under the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000), the matter stood transferred to this Court on grounds of territorial jurisdiction.