ISMAIL MUHAMMAD BHAI vs YOUNUS ALI GAZDAR
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court judgment that dismissed an appeal against a decree based on an arbitration award. The petitioner contended that the Arbitrator failed to adjudicate upon all disputes referred to him, specifically arguing that the award was confined to only a few matters. The Supreme Court examined the terms of reference and the Arbitrator's findings, noting that the Arbitrator had indeed addressed the points of reference. Crucially, the Court observed that the petitioner had filed written objections to the award in the lower court but failed to raise the grievance that any specific aspect of the dispute remained undetermined. The Court held that a party cannot be permitted to raise such an objection as an afterthought at a subsequent stage of the proceedings if it was not pleaded during the initial objection phase. Finding no question of law requiring further examination, the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal.
- Can a party challenge an arbitration award on the ground of incomplete adjudication if that objection was not raised in the initial written objections to the award?
- Is an appellate court required to entertain a grievance regarding the scope of an arbitration award if it was not raised before the trial court?
ORDER
' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the appellate judgment/order of the High Court dated 30-11-1989 whereby his appeal against the decision of the learned Judge in Chambers making the award the decree of the Court was dismissed in limine.
2. The only contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Arbitrator had not decided all the disputes that were referred to the Arbitrator and instead he confined the Award to only few of the matters in dispute. Apparently, this contention of the learned counsel may look tenable as the Arbitrator had extracted the following terms of reference:- "(a) Measurement of the work actually done by the Contractor.
(b) Evaluation of the work done.
(c) Settlement of accounts between the parties. In other words:
(i) how much money, Mr. Younus Ali received by way of goodwill;
(ii) how much he had paid to the owner, or spent on his account;
(iii) how much remained with him, after adjustment of the cost of construction; or
(iv) he had to receive some amount towards cost of the construction."
' He dealt with all of them. In his Objection to the Award, though the petitioner dealt with each item referred to by the Arbitrator and dealt with by him, the Petitioner made no grievance at all of the fact that there was any aspect of the dispute between the parties which was left out for determination. Having not raised such an objection in writing when he was objecting to the Award, he cannot be allowed to raise it as an afterthought at a subsequent stage of the proceedings.
3. We find that no question of law such as may require our further examination arises in the case.
Hence, leave to appeal is refused.