RAJARAM LAKHMANI Vs. NAND KISHORE SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appellant was defendant no. 1 in Title Suit No. 82. of 1977, in the court below, who has filed this miscellaneous appeal against the order, dated 27.6.86 whereby the trial court has made the award rule of the court. Pursuant to the agreements, dated 24.5.73 and 15.10.74, the dispute was referred to the two arbitrators, namely, Shiv Chandra Prasad and Nand Kishore Singh and it was agreed that the decision of the arbitrators shall be binding upon the parties. The arbitrator, thereafter, pronounced the award on 21.9.77, which has been marked Ext.2 in the court below. Thereafter, the arbitrators issued notices to the parties informing them regarding pronouncement of the award. The said notices were marked Exts. 3 and 3/A. Ultimately, the arbitrators filed the award before the court below on 19.12.77, which was registered as Title Suit No. 82 of 1977 wherein the arbitrators were made plaintiffs in the suit. The arbitrators, after filing of the award became functus officio and had nothing to do with the subsequent proceedings. The court below, therefore, has unnecessarily made them plaintiffs in the suit. The appellant, who was defendant no. 1 in the court below, has filed an objection, as envisaged under Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act for setting aside the award on various grounds including the grounds, which are being agitated in this appeal and the court below, on consideration of the materials on record including the oral evidence led on behalf of the parties, has made the award rule of the court, by its judgment and order, dated 27.6.86.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the court below mainly on two grounds, firstly, that the entire arbitration proceeding before the arbitrators is vitiated because of non -consideration of the materials on record and further the arbitrators have exceeded their jurisdiction in giving the award, inasmuch as, there were two agreements, but the dispute was referred to the arbitrators with respect to only one agreement, but curiously enough, the arbitrators have given the award with respect to the entire disputes covered under both the agreements. Learned counsel therefore, submits that the judgment and order of the trial court making the award rule of the court is vitiated in law, and, as such, requires to be interfered with in this miscellaneous appeal. Learned counsel for the respondents has, however, controverted the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that on the basis of the admitted position, the arbitrators have given the award with respect to the disputes, in question, covered under both the agreements entered into between the parties.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, the agreements entered into between the parties have to be looked into. The dispute referred to the arbitrators is Ext. D marked by the court below, wherefrom it appears that two persons, namely, Shiv Chandra Prasad and Nand Kishore Singh were appointed arbitrators with respect to the entire dispute, in question, and it was further agreed that they would abide by the decisions of the arbitrators. From the order of reference, it does not appear that the reference was made only with respect to only one of the two agreements. From the reference, however, it appears that the entire disputes were referred to the arbitrators. In that view of the matter, the first submission raised by the learned counsel for the appellant has to be rejected outright. The second contention of the learned counsel for the appellant has also to be rejected on the ground that the matter was referred to the arbitrators to adjudicate the disputes, as a whole, and particularly when the parties agreed to abide by the decision of the arbitrators. Therefore, this argument, at this stage, cannot be accepted. It appears that the arbitrators have considered all aspects of the matter and pronounced the award, which cannot be said to be an error on the face of the impugned order. This is well settled principle of law that the award of the arbitrators can only be challenged under the provisions mentioned in the Arbitration Act and not beyond that.