1981 PLP 311 (CLC)
LTD., KARACHI‑Appellant Versus EJAZ AHMED KHAWAJA AND 3 OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1981 PLP 311 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Zaffar Hussain Mirza and Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | LTD., KARACHI‑Appellant Versus EJAZ AHMED KHAWAJA AND 3 OTHERS‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 311 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 311 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Zaffar Hussain Mirza and Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 311 (CLC) (LTD., KARACHI‑Appellant Versus EJAZ AHMED KHAWAJA AND 3 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mansoorul Arfin for Appellant.
- Naraindas C. Motiani for Respondents.
- Dates of hearing: 27th and 28th May, 1980.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑ ‑ S. 33‑Award‑Appreciation of evidence‑Court while examining legality of award, held, cannot substitute its own finding on apprecia tion of evidence in place of one given by Arbitrators or Umpire even if Court reaches to a different conclusion on evidence.‑[Evi dence‑Award]. (b) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑ ‑‑ S. 33 and Evidence Act (I of 1872)‑Arbitration proceedings Procedural law‑Proceedings before Arbitrators or Umpire‑In nature of proceedings before a domestic tribunal ‑ Strict compliance of procedural law or law of evidence, held, cannot be insisted upon in such proceedings. (c) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑ S. 15‑Award‑Error apparent on face of award, held, must be discoverable by reading award itself and not by reference to other materials namely record and proceedings before Arbitrators or umpire.‑[Award]. Muhammad Sadiq Muhammad Afzal v. Ministry of Industries, Department of Supply and Development, Government of Pakistan P L D 1966 Kar. 412; Sadlq‑Muhammad Afzal v. Ministry of ludustries P L D 1962 Kar. 113; Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Industries v. Messrs Asians Associated Agencies Limited P L D 1974 Kar. 155; Chamosey Ehara Company v. The Jivraj Balloo Spinning & Weaving Company Limited A I R 1923 P C 66 and A. Z. Company v. S. Mould Bakhsh Muhammad Bashir P L D 1965 S C 505 ref. (d) Partnership Act (IX of 1932)‑ ‑‑‑ S. 19(2)‑Partnership‑Implied authority of partner‑Authority of one of partners to make a reference to arbitration on behalf of other partners, held, need not be in writing or in express terms‑Such authority may be implied and can be inferred by conduct of other partners before and after making such reference. (e) Partnership Act (IX of 1932)‑ ‑ S. 19(2)‑Authority of partner to make reference to arbitration can be challenged only by other partners and not by strangers. Muhammad Azam Muhammad Fazil & Co. v. N. A. Industries, Karachi P L D 1977 Kar. 21; President, Union of India v. Kalinga Construction Co. Ltd. A I R 1971 S C 1646 and Sideman Haji Muhammad & Co, v. State Bank of Pakistan P L D 1960 Kar. 78 ref.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑ S. 33 and Evidence Act (I of 1872)‑Arbitration proceedings Procedural law‑Proceedings before Arbitrators or Umpire‑In nature of proceedings before a domestic tribunal ‑ Strict compliance of procedural law or law of evidence, held, cannot be insisted upon in such proceedings. (c) Arbitration Act (X of 1940)‑ S. 15‑Award‑Error apparent on face of award, held, must be discoverable by reading award itself and not by reference to other materials namely record and proceedings before Arbitrators or umpire.‑[Award]. Muhammad Sadiq Muhammad Afzal v. Ministry of Industries, Department of Supply and Development, Government of Pakistan P L D 1966 Kar. 412; Sadlq‑Muhammad Afzal v. Ministry of ludustries P L D 1962 Kar. 113; Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Industries v. Messrs Asians Associated Agencies Limited P L D 1974 Kar. 155; Chamosey Ehara Company v. The Jivraj Balloo Spinning & Weaving Company Limited A I R 1923 P C 66 and A. Z. Company v. S. Mould Bakhsh Muhammad Bashir P L D 1965 S C 505 ref. (d) Partnership Act (IX of 1932)‑ ‑‑‑ S. 19(2)‑Partnership‑Implied authority of partner‑Authority of one of partners to make a reference to arbitration on behalf of other partners, held, need not be in writing or in express terms‑Such authority may be implied and can be inferred by conduct of other partners before and after making such reference. (e) Partnership Act (IX of 1932)‑ ‑ S. 19(2)‑Authority of partner to make reference to arbitration can be challenged only by other partners and not by strangers. Muhammad Azam Muhammad Fazil & Co. v. N. A. Industries, Karachi P L D 1977 Kar. 21; President, Union of India v. Kalinga Construction Co. Ltd. A I R 1971 S C 1646 and Sideman Haji Muhammad & Co, v. State Bank of Pakistan P L D 1960 Kar. 78 ref. Mansoorul Arfin for Appellant. Naraindas C. Motiani for Respondents. Dates of hearing: 27th and 28th May, 1980.