ARBN HINDUSTHAN STEEL Vs. APPEJAY PR LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for re-moval of the arbitrators, revoking the authority of the arbitrators and for declaration that the arbitration agreement dated April 8, 1960 has ceased to have any effect with respect to the differences referred to the said arbitrators, and for other reliefs.

(2.) THIS application, in my opinion, can be disposed on one point of law on the basis of a few undisputed facts without going into the elaborate arguments advanced before me.

(3.) THERE were disputes and differences between the parties regarding the matters mentioned in the said agreement on or about September 10, 1963. The respondent appointed Mr. Holways, Barrister-at-Law as its arbitrator under the said arbitration clause. On or about September 21, 1963 the petitioner appointed Mr. S.K. Mukherji, Barrister-at-Law as its arbitrator under the said arbitration clause. On or about December 12. 1963 the arbitrators entered into the reference. They held their first sitting on or about December 20, 1963. They gave directions in the matter. The respondent filed a statement of claim before the arbitrators. The petitioner also made counter claim against the respondent before the arbitrators. In these circumstances on or about June 12, 1964 the respondent filed a suit against Union of India in respect of matters which were considered earlier to be within the ambit of the arbitration clause notwithstanding the pendency of the said arbitration proceedings Before the said arbitrators. THEREafter on or about December 4, 1964 the, respondent served a notice on the arbitrators under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The respondent did not make any application under Section 34 in the suit. The respondent filed its written statement. The suit is now proceeding and the petitioner is now unwilling to have the matter settled by arbitration and prefers that disputes and differences should be settled in the suit.