Dismissed

Abid Hussain Meherbankaha v. Chhotekhan Ghassikhan

Bombay HC7 Mar 2005APP/165/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A two-judge bench dismissed an appeal against a single judge's order quashing an arbitration award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the award-holder had considered the validity of the agreement and factual findings on evidence were not reviewable. Dismissal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal against the dismissal of the arbitration petition was dismissed.

. This is an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge dismissing the arbitration petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, l996, hereinafter called the ‘Act’. The award of the arbitrator has been challenged essentially on two grounds (i) that the arbitrator has not taken into consideration and given finding on the question whether there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties and, therefore, the award is liable to be set aside and (ii) that the finding of the arbitrator in para 32 of the award inter alia refusing to accept the evidence of the handwriting expert on the ground that he was not familiar with the script which was in Urdu is a serious error of law and, therefore,

. So far as the first submission is concerned, in our opinion the issues which are framed by the arbitrator in respect of the validity of the partnership and/or contention whether it is forged or not in issue nos.l to 4 framed by the arbitrator and the discussion which has been made in respect of the said issues indicate that the arbitrator has considered the issues whether there is a valid arbitration agreement or not. Having given the finding that there was a valid deed of partnership it necessarily follows that there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties. Thus the submission of the learned counsel that the arbitrator has not given any finding on the issue of existence of a valid arbitration agreement must be rejected.

. The second submission of the learned counsel that the arbitrator has committed error of law in refusing to accept the evidence of handwriting expert cannot be entertained in a petition under section 34 of the Act. In our opinion the finding given by the learned Arbitrator in para 33 of the

award is passed on evidence and material on record before the arbitrator. The learned arbitrator has considered the evidence and has found that the evidence of the handwriting expert was not reliable and was not believable and accordingly discarded the same . The finding of the arbitrator is based on material on record and is essentially a finding of fact and cannot be interfered within limited

Abid Hussain Meherbankaha v. Chhotekhan Ghassikhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid Hussain Meherbankaha v. Chhotekhan Ghassikhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Century Enka Ltd. Vs S.R.Pathak.

The Maharashtra State Co-Op. Marketing Fed. Ltd. Vs Dr. Ashok H. Bathija

Imtiaz Ahmed a.Mulla and Ors. Vs Air India Ltd.and Ors.

M/S Parle International Pvt.Ltd Vs Mrs Jaya G Shipmpi and Ors.

Datar Switchgear Ltd. Vs Tata Finance Ltd. and Anr.

Reshma Irfan Vs Parth Share and Stock Brokeer Pvt.Ltd (Inliquidation)