M/S OSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. versus M/S OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.

M/S OSWAL WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. versus M/S OSWAL AGRO MILLS LTD.

The Supreme Court held that, upon reference to an Umpire due to disagreement between arbitrators, the Umpire is to consider only the issues of disagreement and is not required to re-hear or re-record all evidence de novo unless a party applies for such hearing at the earliest and not as a last resort. The appellant’s belated application for de novo hearing did not seek actual re-examination or re-recording of evidence but was intended for review of arbitrators’ orders, amounting to strategic conduct and hence, waiver of the right. There was no error in the award or in the courts below making the award rule of the court.

Parties
Appellant: M/S Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd.; Respondent: M/S Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Decision on Special Leave From a Division Bench Decision of the High Court Dismissing the Appellant's Appeal Against the Making of an Arbitration Award Rule of the Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reference to Umpire Under Arbitration Act, 1940, De Novo Arbitration Hearing, Waiver by Conduct, Interpretation of Arbitration Procedure, Purposive Interpretation of Statutes
Arbitration Reference to Umpire Under Arbitration Act, 1940 De Novo Arbitration Hearing Waiver by Conduct Interpretation of Arbitration Procedure Purposive Interpretation of Statutes

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd.

Appellant

M/S Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal Decision on Special Leave From a Division Bench Decision of the High Court Dismissing the Appellant's Appeal Against the Making of an Arbitration Award Rule of the Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Umpire must hear the matter de novo on a reference after disagreement between arbitrators, or only from the stage of disagreement
  2. 2 Whether right to de novo hearing is available and can be waived by conduct
  3. 3 Whether the award was liable to be set aside due to non-hearing de novo

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that, upon reference to an Umpire due to disagreement between arbitrators, the Umpire is to consider only the issues of disagreement and is not required to re-hear or re-record all evidence de novo unless a party applies for such hearing at the earliest and not as a last resort. The appellant’s belated application for de novo hearing did not seek actual re-examination or re-recording of evidence but was intended for review of arbitrators’ orders, amounting to strategic conduct and hence, waiver of the right. There was no error in the award or in the courts below making the award rule of the court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.