A. N. RAY, D. G. PALEKAR, S. M. SIKRI
Keshavsinh Dwarkadas Kapadia – Appellant
Versus
Indian Engineering Company – Respondent
Judgement
RAY, J.:- These two appeals are by special leave against the judgment dated 17 October, 1968 of the High Court at Bombay determining under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act that the umpire rightly entered upon the reference and further extending the time till 31 December 1968 for making an award thereof by the umpire.
2. Two questions arise for consideration in these appeals. First whether there can be any valid appointment of umpire by arbitrators without obtaining consent of the appointee to be an umpire. Second, on the construction of the arbitration agreement in the present case was the operation of paragraph 4 of Schedule I of the Arbitration Act excluded with the result that the umpire could enter upon the reference only in the event of a difference arising between the arbitrators.
3. On 26 April, 1967 there was an arbitration agreement between the partnership firm of Indian Engineering Company and Keshavsinh Dwarkadas Kapadia. Kapadia had appointed M/s. Chetan Trading Company as the sole selling agent of Kapadia s several products including aluminium and copper wires by an agreement dated 16 September, 1965. Chetan Trading Company in their turn appointed Indian Engine
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.