- (1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of the trial Judge dated March 7, 1989, whereby the authority of the arbitrator was revoked on the ground that the arbitrator did not complete the arbitration proceedings within four months.
(2.) THE facts: Shri M. K. Jain, Government Contractor, Jind, respondent No. 1 (for short, the contractor) entered into a contract with the Haryana State Electricity Board, petitioner (for short, the Board) for the annual maintenance of Vidyut Nagar Hissar in 1983-84 and written agreement was duly executed between the parties. The contractor was not made full payment for the work executed by him. The contractor served a notice dated March 29, 1986 through registered A. D. post on the arbitrator to give his award within four months from the receipt of the notice, but the arbitrator did not settle the dispute within the period specified. The arbitrator is an employee of the Board/and is under the influence of his employer. The arbitrator did not render the award necessitating the initiation of proceedings under Sections 3. 5, 8, 11. M and 20 read with Schedule Rule 3 of the Arbitration Apt, 1940 (for short, the Act) for appointment of a new arbitrator. The Board denied the allegations made in the petition and asserted that the petition is premature. It was also averred that a sum of Rs 55,000/- was paid to the contractor on January 31, 1984 at the time of starting of the work, it was also stated that the arbitrator had conducted six. . meetings on different dates during the statutory period of four months.
(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial Judge framed the following issues :- (1) Whether the arbitrator is liable to be removed on the grounds allege ? OPR (2) Whether this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the petition ill dispute ? OPR (3) Relief.;