MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN and others
This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a judgment of the Lahore High Court upholding the dismissal of a revision petition against an order making an arbitration award the rule of the court. The core legal question was whether the lower courts erred in making the arbitration award the rule of the court without framing issues and recording evidence on objections, and whether the arbitrator misconducted the proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the trial court properly considered and disposed of the objections after hearing the parties, and the petitioner failed to establish any misconduct on the part of the arbitrator. Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower fora and dismissed the petition. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not re-examine factual controversies under constitutional jurisdiction where lower courts have lawfully adjudicated upon objections to an arbitration award and no jurisdictional defect or misconduct is proven.
- Whether an arbitration award can be made the rule of the court without framing issues and recording evidence on objections?
- Does the failure of an arbitrator to record a party's statement according to their wishes constitute legal misconduct?
- Will the Supreme Court re-examine factual controversies relating to arbitration proceedings under Article 185(3) of the Constitution?
- Article 185(3), Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, ACTG. C.J.--- This petition calls in question judgment, dated 8th June, 2004 passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench in Writ Petition No,2483 of 2004.
2. Precisely stating facts of the case are that parties preferred their dispute to an Arbitrator arising out of civil suit filed by the petitioner in the Court of Civil Judge, Multan. The Arbitrator gave the award which was objected to and finally the same was made rule of the Court, it may be noted that after the appointment of Arbitrator the petitioner-defendant submitted application for cancellation of his appointment but could not succeed in his effort and ultimately a petition for leave to appeal instituted by him before this Court was also dismissed vide order dated 19th June, 2003. However, after filing of arbitration award objections were submitted on it which were taken into consideration and were disposed of as a result whereof award was made rule of the Court vide judgment, dated 16th September, 2003.. Petitioner preferred a revision before the Additional District Judge, Multan which was dismissed on 13th May 2004. A writ was also filed by the petitioner which too was dismissed on 28th June, 2004, hence instant petition for leave to appeal has been filed.
3. Learned counsel stated that the objections had not been disposed of by the, learned Civil. Judge after framing issues and providing opportunity to him to produce the evidence. It may be noted that the learned trial Court had taken into consideration the objection and after hearing the parties had disposed of the same but the evidence was not recorded perhaps there was no need to do so.
It is next contended by the learned counsel that the Arbitrator has mis-conducted as the statement of the petitioner was not recorded. In this behalf learned counsel for caveat had invited our attention towards the objection filed by the petitioner before the trial Court wherein he himself admitted that his statement was recorded but perhaps, it was not according to his own wishes.
4. Since the petitioner had failed to make out a case of misconduct before learned trial and High Court on the part of the Arbitrator because no interference was shown, as such for this reason we are also not inclined to examine the factual controversy under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
' Thus for the forgoing reason petition is dismissed.
Cited by 5 cases
- National Highway Authority through Chairman, Islamabad vs Messrs 2023 SCMR 1103
- National Highway Authority through its Chairman, Islamabad vs M/s 2023 SCP 81
- ENGRO FERTILIZERS LIMITED Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Industries, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad 2014 CLD 132
- MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ vs THE STATE and another 2010 YLR 1812
- Engro Fertilizers Limited (formerly known as Exxon Chemical Pakistan