Chokhi Dhani Vs JS Construction (Madhya Pradesh High court)
Held that qualification of the arbitrator as per the arbitration agreement is pre-requisite for eligibility to be appointed as an appointed as an arbitrator. Arbitrator not satisfying the qualification is ineligible and arbitral award passed by such ineligible arbitrator cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Facts-
The appellant alleged that ex-parte award was passed by the arbitrator. The application filed by the appellant under order 7 rule 11 of CPC was rejected by the arbitrator. Accordingly, a civil revision was filed before the court, however, after passing of the final award by the arbitrator, the civil revision had become infructuous.
The award passed by the arbitrator was challenged by the appellant u/s 34 of the Act before the District Judge which was dismissed by the District Judge and hence this appeal.
Conclusion-
Held that the dispute is referable to the arbitrator in accordance with condition no.46 of the Arbitration Agreement. This condition also prescribes the qualification of an arbitrator which are, “(A) fellow of the institution of Engineers India or (B) fellow of the Indian Institute of Architects or © Member of the Institute of the Surveyors (India)”. The arbitrator has not dealt with the aforesaid aspect of the matter in the light of the said qualification of the Arbitrator which, in the considered opinion of this court is sufficient to non-suit the respondent as the qualifications of an arbitrator are sine qua non for his eligibility to be appointed as an arbitrator. In view of the same, the impugned order passed under s.34 as also the award passed by the arbitrator cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and are liable to be set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
