T.S. Thakur, J. - (1.)A non-speaking arbitral award in favour of the appellant-company was set aside by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi on the ground that the Arbitrator had not recorded his 'findings' as required under Clause 70 of the General Conditions of Contract. Relying upon the decisions of this Court in M/s Daffadar Bhagat Singh and Sons Vs. Income-tax officer, A Ward, Ferozepur, AIR 1969 SC 340 , Bhanji Bhadgwandas Vs. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, AIR 1968 SC 139 and Rajinder Nath etc. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi, AIR 1979 SC 1933 the High Court held that the expression 'finding' appearing in Clause 70 of the General Conditions of Contract implies something more than the mere recording of a conclusion by the Arbitrator. Inasmuch as the Arbitrator had failed to do so, the award rendered by him was unsustainable. The High Court accordingly set aside the award and remitted the matter back to the Arbitrator for a fresh determination of the disputes between the parties.
(2.)An appeal was then preferred by the appellant-company before a Division Bench of the High Court who relying upon the decision of this Court in Gora Lal Vs. Union of India, (2003) 12 SCC 459 affirmed the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Dissatisfied, the appellant has approached this Court by special leave.
(3.)When the matter initially came up before a Bench comprising R.V. Raveendran and J.M. Panchal, JJ. on 5th Jan., 2009 the Court noticed a divergence in the decision rendered by this Court in Gora Lal's case (supra) and that rendered in Build India Construction System Vs. Union of India, (2002) 5 SCC 433 . The matter was, therefore, referred to a larger Bench to resolve the conflict. That is precisely how this appeal has been listed before us.