- (1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Hon'ble first Court dated 7th September, 2004 whereby and whereunder His Lordship has been pleased to set aside the award passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator on merit. Before His Lordship the respondent (applicant therein) took two broad points (1) learned Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to decide the subject matter; (2) the impugned award was passed without giving opportunity of hearing in real sense and furthermore no reason has been given by the learned Arbitrator.
(2.) The respondent specifically raised preliminary point of jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator has rejected the plea of lack of jurisdiction and while doing so has given reasons upon interpreting documents and also applying the principle of law decided by the Courts. The Hon'ble first Court did not find any fault in tnis decision making process by the learned Arbitrator on the preliminary point. The learned first Court of course on merit has accepted the respondent's contention that the impugned award does not carry any reason nor any opportunity of being heard was given.
(3.) Aggrieved by the latter portion of the judgment and order of the Hon'ble first Court the appellant approached us with this appeal. It is apposite to record that the respondent did not lag behind to challenge the decisions of the learned Arbitrator before the learned first Court on the question of jurisdiction contending appointment of learned Arbitrator is de hors the arbitration clause.;