An arbitration clause does not prevent a contract from being assignable unless the contract is personal in nature or the arbitration clause itself indicates a personal nature of the covenant.

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application for setting aside of an award dated the 28th March, 1973. In order to appreciate the point urged in this application the facts that need be referred to briefly are that there was an agreement in writing between Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. , the petitioner herein and M/s. Bharat Spun Pipe Company. The said contract was executed on the 7th October, 1967. One Shrigopal Modi was the sole proprietor of Bharat Spun Pipe Company at that time. Thereafter, sometime in 1968 the said Messrs. Bharat Spun Pipe Company was transformed into a partnership firm and some persons were taken in as partners. At the hearing of this application a deed of partnership dated the 2nd of November, 1967, was produced before me whereunder this partnership was formed in respect of the said contract with the Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. and the work carried thereunder. According to the petitioner the petitioner was not aware of this transformation of the composition of Messrs. Bharat Spun Pipe Company. According to the respondent, however, the petitioner was duly informed by a letter and the petitioner continued to have transactions with Messrs. Bharat Spun Pipe Company and made payment to the said company after it had been changed into the said partnership firm as mentioned hereinbefore. Thereafter, disputes and differences having arisen between the parties about payment in respect of the said contract, there was a reference to arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause contained in the said contract. Two arbitrators were nominated by the parties and they have nominated an umpire. Before the arbitrators statement and counter statement of facts were duly filed. The statement of fact on behalf of the claimant Messrs. Bharat Spun Pipe Company was filed by the partnership firm and Shrigopal Modi was acting for the said firm. Originally in the counter statement of fact no point had been taken regarding the change of this partnership firm. It appears that thereafter during the course of hearing at the time of evidence of Shrigopal Modi an application for amendment of the counter statement of fact was filed by the petitioner and the same was allowed by the arbitrators. Thereafter, upon hearing the parties the arbitrators have made an order awarding a sum of Rs. 89,842. 42 P. in full settlement of the claim of the respondent and also directing that the petitioner should refund the security deposit of Rs. 48,017/- to the respondent. This award as mentioned hereinbefore has been challenged before me.

( 2 ) IN the petition two grounds were taken. It was urged, firstly, that the arbitrators had given no reasons for their award. This ground was. rightly, not pressed by counsel for the petitioner. It was, secondly, urged that the reference to arbitration was by a party with whom the petitioner did not have any agreement containing any arbitration clause and the award in favour of Messrs. Bharat Spun Pipe Company which was a partnership firm was invalid and illegal as the petitioner never had entered into any agreement containing any arbitration clause with the said partnership firm. It was urged that the petitioner had transactions with Shrigopal Modi who is the sole proprietor and carrying on business under the name and style of Bharat Spun Pipe Company and the partnership firm was not entitled to enforce the award in respect of the arbitration agreement between Shrigopal Modi and Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. The award was, therefore, without jurisdiction and null and void.

( 3 ) THE main point upon which this attack is based is that there could not have been any assignment in law of any arbitration clause and as such the reference to arbitration by the subsequent partnership firm was wholly without jurisdiction and illegal. It was, secondly, urged that in fact there was no assignment of the arbitration agreement. The question, is. whether a clause which contained an arb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document