Pakistan Case Law
1973 SCMR 98

MESSRS AJ BAG CORPORATION vs PAKISTAN THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, ISLAMABAD AND 3 Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1973 SCMR 98
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 68 of 1972
Date1973-02-08
Judge(s)Sajjad Ahmad and Waheeduddin Ahmad
Authored bySajjad Ahmad
ResultLeave refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for special leave is directed against an order of the High Court of Sind and Baluchistan revoking the authority of an arbitrator appointed under an agreement between the parties. The High Court had acted upon an application under sections 5 and 11 of the Arbitration Act 1940, filed on behalf of Pakistan, seeking the removal of the arbitrator on the ground that the Pakistan State was a necessary party but had not been impleaded either before the court or the arbitrator. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel conceded that the Government was a necessary party and sought time to implead it. The Supreme Court held that the High Court was entirely correct in its view, as arbitration proceedings conducted in the absence of a necessary party lack legal sanction. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, affirming the termination of the arbitrator's authority.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether arbitration proceedings conducted in the absence of a necessary party lack legal sanction?
  • Can the authority of an arbitrator be revoked if a necessary party was not impleaded in the dispute?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 5, Arbitration Act 1940
  • Section 11, Arbitration Act 1940
arbitrationrevocation of arbitrator's authoritynecessary partyspecial leave petitionarbitration proceedings

1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-This petition for special leave is directed against the order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, whereby he has revoked the authority of the arbitrator, who was appointed earlier under an arbitration in the agreement between the parties to settle the disputes arising between them. It appears that this order of the learned Single Judge, which is dated the 26th of May 1972, was passed on an application moved on behalf of "Pakistan" under sections 5 and 11 of the Arbitration Act of 1940 for the removal of the arbitrator and for the revocation of his authority, on the main contention that the dispute involved in the case was the concern of the Pakistan State, which was neither made a party in the case before the Honourable Court nor before the arbitrator. The impugned order of the learned Single Judge shows that during the hearing 7 of this petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Chishti, asked for time to implead the Government, conceding thereby that 'the Pakistan Government was a necessary party. In that situ--ation, the learned Single Judge was perfectly right in his view that the appointment of the arbitrator and the arbitration proceedings taken in the absence of a necessary party viz., Pakistan lacked legal sanction. The authority of the arbitrator was, therefore, rightly terminated.

2. There is no substance in this petition, which is dismissed.

Cited by 2 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.