A.N.Bhandari, C.J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent raises the question whether the learned Single Judge was justified in setting aside an award on the ground that the defendant was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the arbitrator.
(2.) DURING the course of a protracted litigation, the parties agreed to refer the matters in controversy between themselves to arbitration, by means of a submission which was in the following terms : "The award of the arbitrator whether with or without enquiry made within one month from today, shall be final and binding on the parties, and it will not be open to any objection. It would be in the sole "discretion of the arbitrator to take evidence or not, to hear any party or not, and to arrive at his decision in any way he likes, even behind the back of both or either of the parties. The fee of the arbitrator to be fixed by the Court will be borne by the defendants." The arbitrator gave his award on 8-3-1952 and this award was made a rule of the Court. A learned Single Judge of this Court, however, set aside the award on the ground that the arbitrator had denied the defendant a reasonable opportunity of being heard, The plaintiff has appealed and the question, for this Court is whether the learned Single Judge has come to a correct determination in point of law. Mr. Narula, who appears for the defendant, contends that the arbitrator is guilty of misconduct first because he proceeded to give his award without hearing the evidence of the witnesses whom the defendant wanted to produce, and secondly because it was the duty of the arbitrator, before taking ex parte proceedings against the defendant, to give the defendant a notice of his intention so to do.
(3.) AN arbitration is an extra judicial determination of a controversy by one or, more unofficial persons chosen by the parties as a domestic tribunal for the purpose of settling the disputed matter submitted to it for decision and award. It provides a summary and inexpensive method of settling disputes and is encouraged by the Courts because of its economy, freedom from technicalities and business-like method of resolving differences. Every arbitration agreement must be liberally construed so as to give effect to the intention of the parties and every award must be considered regular, if on the face of it, it is unimpeachable. Every presumption must be made to sustain the award. AN arbitrator's decision will not beset aside because of the admission of illegal evidence, nor for an error in judgment provided he acts honestly and fairly according to such abilities as he may possess. If however, he fails to exercise a high degree of judicial impartiality, or if his conduct is indicative of unfairness and bias, his award may be set aside on the ground of judicial misconduct. The procedure before arbitrators may be regulated either by the statute or by agreement or submission. Where the procedure is prescribed by the agreement of submission and where such procedure is not contrary to the laws of the land, that procedure must prevail. Emperor v. Angad MR 1929 All 69; Mt. Aftab Begam v. Haji Abdul Majid Khan. AIR 1924 All 800 (1); Debi Das V. Keshava Deo, AIR 1945 All 423; Durga Prasad v. Sew Kishen Das, AIR 1949 PC 334; Baijnath v. Bajranglal Kamalia, AIR 1938 Cal 166 and D. L. Miller and Co. Ltd. v. Daluram Gogunmull, (S) AIR 1956 Cal 361.;