VINAY BUBNA Vs. YOGESH MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in this petition impugns the award dated 22nd January, 1998. The Award is challenged on several grounds. The principal contention is that the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal was contrary to section 10 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. (hereinafter shall be referred to as the Arbitration Act, 1996), is contrary to the provisions. Similar points have been raised in various other petitions which came up before me. In that light, on 4th August, 1998 by an order the petitioner was also directed to join the Bombay Stock Exchange as party-respondent in the proceedings as the issue involves the Bombay Stock Exchange who were referring the matters to arbitration based on their Bye-laws. As similar point also arose in the other petitions Counsel appearing in other proceedings were also allowed to intervene and advance arguments in the present petition. By notice dated 4th August, 1998 parties were also informed that the petition would be finally disposed of. In the light of that the following order :-Admit. Respondents waive service. To be heard forthwith.

(2.) IN the present petition the three contentions raised by the petitioner are as under :-

(3.) I will first deal with the first contention in respect of which arguments have been advanced by the parties including intervening Counsel. I would formulate the question to be decided as under :-