The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of promoting settlement in family disputes and the need for flexibility in arbitration among family members. The Court emphasized the reluctance to undo a family settlement unless it is unfair to the extent of shocking the judicial conscience.

1. The challenge in this petition, under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’) is to an Award dated 24th July 2004 passed by the arbitral Tribunal (‘AT’) in the disputes between the parties.

2. Petitioner No.1 is Mr. Narender Kumar and Petitioner No.2 is Mr. Ashok Kumar and the Respondent is Mr. Rameshwar Kumar. All three are sons of late Mr. Prabhu Dayal. Mr. Rameshwar Kumar is the eldest son and Mr. Narender Kumar and Mr. Ashok Kumar are the 2nd and 3rd sons respectively.

3. The Petitioners state that Mr. Prabhu Dayal had the following self-acquired properties:

(i) A-2/6, Model Town, Delhi.

(ii) ½ share in Shop No.367, Main Sadar Bazar, Delhi;

(iii) ½ share in property No.XIII/3011-3022; Bahadurgarh Road, Delhi.

4. The Petitioners state that the Respondent fell out with his late father and on 16th October 1999 Mr. Prabhu Dayal published a notice in the National Herald, disowning him. It is stated that on 22nd September 2000, Mr. Prabhu Dayal executed a Will, which was also registered, in which he disinherited and disowned the Respondent from all his movable and immovable assets due to threats and physical assaults on him by the Respondent and his two sons and his wife. It is stated that during the lifetime of Mr. Prabhu Dayal it was agreed that the disputes regarding the parties could be resolved through the arbitration of respectable persons belonging to Multan Sewa Samiti, i.e., Dr. B.N. Khanna, Mr. Om Prakash Thukral and Mr. Nand Lal. Although it is admitted that there was an agreement entered into between the parties on 17th July 2002 agreeing to refer the disputes mentioned in Annexure-A to the agreement to arbitration, the Petitioners state that the only dispute that was referred to arbitration concerned the residential property at A-2/6, Model Town, Delhi.

5. It is further contended by the Petitioners that no arbitral proceedings, in fact, took place and that they received no notice of such proceedings at any time after the agreement was signed. Mr. Prabhu Dayal expired on 14th December 2003. It is stated that even if the arbitral proceedings had commenced prior thereto, they certainly abated after the death of Mr. Prabhu Dayal. They could not be continued without the participation of his Class-I legal heirs which included his daughter, Ms. Asha Rani. Consequently, a notice dated 30th July 2004 was sent to the AT. The AT had by then already concluded the arbitral proceedings and had passed the impugned Award dated 24th July 2004, the copies of which were dispatched to the Petitioners on 8th August 2004. According to the Petitioners, the impugned Award on the one hand dealt with issues which were not the subject-matter of arbitration and on the other failed to deal with some of the disputes that were actually referred to arbitration.

6. In terms of the impugned Award unanimously passed by the AT, it was decided, after consulting the three sons of Mr. Prabhu Dayal, that 1/3rd value of the properties, i.e., Shop No.367, Main Sadar Bazar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Shop at Sadar Bazar’) and House No.A-2/6, Model Town, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘House’), should be given to each of the three sons. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Petitioner No.2, was given the Shop at Sadar Bazar in lieu of his 1/3rd share in each of the properties owned by Mr. Prabhu Dayal after noting that “he is already running and earning his livelihood from the same premises.” It was further decided that all the three brothers would be restrained from selling, alienating or creating 3rd party interest till Mr. Ashok Kumar vacated the portion in his possession in the Model Town House. Mr. Ashok Kumar was to vacate his portion in the Model Town House and give its possession to Mr. Rameshwar Kumar and Mr. Narender Kumar. In the event of Mr. Ashok Kumar failing to vacate the Model Town House, he was to pay the other two brothers Rs. 25,000 per month from the date of the Award. If Mr. Rameshwar Kumar and Mr. Narender Kumar