Weston, C.J. - (1.) These seven revision applications have come before a Full Bench on a reference made by me in consequence of a decision of a Division Bench in 'Messrs. Rama Kand Vijay Parkash v. Messrs. Gokal Cliand Gian Chand', Civil Revn. No. 114 of 1949, the facts of which were similar to those of the present seven matters.
(2.) These seven matters arose in this way. The present applicants, a firm Messrs. Parmesh-war Das Mehra and Sons of Amritsar, had entered into separate individual contracts with the present seven respondents, who are firms or individuals of Amritsar trading in piece goods, by which Messrs. Parmeshwar Das Mehra and Sons were to supply certain classes and quantities of American piece-goods. The seven con-'tracts were -entered into on dates between the 29th of November 1946 and the 25th of December 1946. Deposits varying from Rs. 350/-to Hs. 1,700/- were paid by the various respondents to Messrs. Parmeshwar Das Mehra and Sons. The contracts were C. I. F. Karachi, shipments being either January-February 1947, or February-March 1947. It appears that the goods of the several contracts arrived at Karachi after some delay, and deliveries were offered by Messrs. Parmeshwar Das Mehra and Sons to the seven respondents on dates between the 26th of June 1947 and the 12th of July 1947. All seven respondents refused delivery on the grounds that both the quantities and qualities offered for delivery were not according to the particular contract. In some instances also it was objected that delivery was not offered at the time stipulated in the contract. The contracts in all instances were executed on identical printed forms, and execution of the contracts was not disputed. One of the terms of the contracts provided for arbitration, and this term ran as follows: "All other terms and conditions as of Karachi piece-goods contract. Any dispute or claim of whatever nature relating to or arising out of this contract, shall be referred to arbitration of two European Merchants engaged in the piece-goods trade at Karachi, one to be appointed by each party and in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act No. 3 (sic) of 1940."
(3.) In or about September 1947 Messrs. Parmeshwar Das Mehra and Sons called upon the various respondents to refer the disputes arising consequent on the respondents' refusal to take delivery to arbitration in the manner provided by the arbitration clause, and they nominated a Mr. Godbert, General Manager of Fleming Shaw & Co. of Karachi as their arbitrator. The respondents refused to proceed under the arbitration clause, and after notices, respondents filed applications under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act in the Court of the Subordinate Judge first class, Amritsar, challenging the validity and enforceability of the arbitration clause. The learned Subordinate Judge by a common order dated the 30th of November 1948 on these applications held that the arbitration clause in the contracts was no longer operative and directed that it should be deemed to have ceased to have effect. He based his conclusion upon a number of grounds. Firstly, he held the phrase "Karachi piece-goods contract" appearing in the arbitration clause to be meaningless, and the contract therefore to be void for uncertainty. Secondly, he considered that Mr. Godbert, the person nominated as arbitrator by Messrs. Parmeshwar Das Mehra and Sons, did not fulfil the qualifications required for an arbitrator under the arbitration clause as he was not a merchant on his own account Thirdly, he held that the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, by reason of partition "must have ceased to have any force in Pakistan". Lastly, he held that the difficulty, expense and danger of parties and their witnesses in going to Karachi was sufficient to make the contract of arbitration inoperative.;