An arbitrator must disclose all facts and circumstances that are likely to influence his or her judgment or bias his or her mind.

Chagla, C.J. :- This appeal arises out of a petition filed by the appellant to set aside an award. Shah, J., dismissed that petition and it is from that order of dismissal that this appeal is preferred. The appellant and the petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent company, the Hind Constructions, Ltd., by which he agreed to act as a sub-contractor in respect of a contract which the respondents had taken. That agreement was entered into on 5th January 1948. In respect of the payment to be made under the agreement there were disputes between the petitioner and the respondent company and the disputes were referred to the arbitration of Dr. Pandya on 8th January, 1949. Dr. Pandya was the general manager and an ex-officio director of the Hind Constructions Ltd. Dr. Pandya directed that an interim payment of Rs. 40, 000 should be made to the petitioner on 11th January 1949 and on 13th January, 1949, he made his award. By this award he directed a further sum of Rs. 10,000 to be paid to the petitioner. The present petition to set aside the award was filed on 23rd April, 1949. The award was challenged on various grounds, but only two grounds and substantially one ground has been pressed before this Court. The ground is that the petitioner was not aware at the time he went to the arbitration of Dr. Pandya that he was a director of the Hind Constructions Ltd. and it is also urged that Dr. Pandya was disqualified from acting as an arbitrator by the interest that he had, the interest being that he was a director of the Hind Constructions, Ltd., and by the fact of the arbitrator having this interest not being disclosed to the petitioner.

2. The contention of the respondent company was that the petitioner was aware of the fact that Dr. Pandya was a director of the Hind Constructions, Ltd., and the learned Judge below has held on a review of the evidence that the fact of Dr. Pandya being a director was disclosed to the petitioner. But another and perhaps a more important point arises in this appeal, and that is whether there was any obligation upon Dr. Pandya to disclose the fact that he was a director of the Hind Constructions, Ltd. It will be perhaps better if we approached the second question first, because if there was no obligation upon Dr. Pandya to disclose that fact, then the decision on the question of fact really becomes unnecessary.

3. Now, in the submission paper it is stated that Dr. Pandya was the general manager of the Hind Constructions, Ltd. What is not stated in the submission paper is the fact that Dr. Pandya was also a director of the respondent company. Assuming that the petitioner was unaware of this fact, assuming that Dr. Pandya never disclosed to the petitioner the fact of his being a director of the respondent company, the question that arises for our consideration is whether in law that non-disclosure should result in the award being set aside.

4. Now, in order to decide this question, we must try and lay down clear principles which should apply to the conduct of arbitrators. There can be no doubt that an arbitrator must show uberrima fides to the parties whose disputes he is going to arbitrate and who have constituted him their domestic forum. In a sense the position of an arbitrator is different from that of a Judge. If a party goes to a Court, he has got to submit to a decision of the Judge. He has no choice in the appointment of the Judge. But when parties go to a domestic forum and want their matters to be determined by arbitration; they have every choice as to the person whom they should select as their arbitrator, and therefore it is clear that highest faith should be shown by the arbitrator. It also follows that the arbitrator must disclose to the parties all facts which are likely or calculated to bias him in any way in favour of one or the other party. A circumstance or a fact may in fact not bias the decision of the arbitrator. The arbitrator may have too strong a character, too dee