M/S LAXMI CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO. versus STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

M/S LAXMI CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO. versus STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

Clause 52 of the agreement, read with precedent, means an arbitrator appointed by designation does not lose mandate on retirement and may continue to conclude proceedings unless disqualified; the Civil Judge's extension of time overruling objections validated the arbitrator's subsequent award, therefore the High Court erred in setting it aside for alleged misconduct.

Parties
Appellant: M/s Laxmi Continental Construction Co.; Respondent: State of U.P. & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 19.06.2007 in A.o. No.1489 of 2001
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Arbitrator by Designation, Retirement of Arbitrator, Validity and Challenge of Arbitral Award, Extension of Time for Making Award, State Amendment to Arbitration Act
Arbitration Contract Law Civil Procedure Appointment of Arbitrator by Designation Retirement of Arbitrator Validity and Challenge of Arbitral Award Extension of Time for Making Award State Amendment to Arbitration Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/s Laxmi Continental Construction Co.

Appellant

State of U.P. & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 19.06.2007 in A.o. No.1489 of 2001

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an arbitrator appointed by designation under clause 52 ceases to have mandate to continue arbitration on retirement
  2. 2 Whether continuance of arbitration proceedings and passing of award by such arbitrator after retirement amounts to misconduct
  3. 3 Whether an order of extension of time by Civil Judge overruling objections precludes challenging the award on ground of arbitrator's retirement

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 52 of the agreement, read with precedent, means an arbitrator appointed by designation does not lose mandate on retirement and may continue to conclude proceedings unless disqualified; the Civil Judge's extension of time overruling objections validated the arbitrator's subsequent award, therefore the High Court erred in setting it aside for alleged misconduct.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned High Court judgment and order dated 19.06.2007 in A.O. No.1489 of 2001 quashed and set aside
  • Award dated 08.01.1998 passed by the Sole Arbitrator restored