M/S. KASHMIR ELECTRIC AND HARDWARE CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
- Citation
- 1996 INSC 796
- Decided
- 26 July 1996
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
The arbitrator did not misconduct himself by accepting courtesies, and such conduct does not amount to corruption or bias under the Arbitration Act, 1944.
Summary
Mis. Kashmir Electric and Hardware Corporation appealed against a decision of the Letters Patent Bench that held an arbitrator had misbehaved by conducting hearings in premises owned by the appellant and accepting tea and refreshments from them. The appellant argued that such courtesies were extended equally to both parties and no objection was raised regarding the venue or refreshments. The Supreme Court examined whether acceptance of these courtesies amounted to corruption or bias under the Arbitration Act, 1944. It found no evidence that the arbitrator’s conduct compromised his impartiality, noting that both parties shared the premises and refreshments. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Letters Patent Bench judgment, and restored the single judge’s finding that there was no arbitrator misconduct. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether an arbitrator’s acceptance of tea and refreshments in premises owned by one party constitutes misconduct under the Arbitration Act, 1944.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
MIS. KASHMIR ELECTRIC AND HARDWARE CORPORATION A
v.
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
JULY 26, 1996
[MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.] B
Arbitratioll Act, 1944 :
Arbitrator-Miscondui;t-Arbitrator conducting sittillgs ill the premises
owlled by the appellants and while doing so accepting tea and refreshntellt C
fivm them alollgwith both the contesting parties-Held, ill the facts alld
circunistances, arbitrator cannot be }Jresiuncd to have co1rupted hiniself in
accepting the coiutesies.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No 9768 of
~ D
From the .T udgmcnt and Order dated 12.5.93 of the Jammu and
Kashmir High Court in C.F.A. No 84 of 1987.
D.D. Thakur and Rajeev Sharma for the Appellant.
E
Ashok Mathur for the Respondent.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted.
F
We have before us the judgment of the learned single Judge of the
Jammu and Kashmir High Court holding that the Arbitrator had not
misconducted himself or the proceedings. We also have before us the
appellate judgment of the Letters Patent Bench under appeal saying to the
contrary. The misconduct blown up is that the Arbitrator had conducted
sitting/sittings in the premi,es owned by the appellants and had during that G
while accepted tea and refreshment from them and hence to have become
guilty of misconduct. It is admitted that he was not alone in that regard as
both the contesting parties before him had equally shared the use of the
premises for the purpose as well as refreshments as part of courtesies. No
objection of any sort, at any point of time, was taken by any one either with H
147
148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 11996] SUPP. 4S.C.R.
A regard to the place of conduct of the proceedings or to those courtesies
e>.tended in the form of refreshment. We fail lo appreciate as to how could
the arbitrator be presumed to have corrupted himself in accepting those
courtesies, in these facts and circumstances. Mr. Ashok Mathur, learned
counsel appearing for the Slate of .Tammu and Kashmir is candid enough
to stale lhal he is unable to support the decision of the Letters Patent
B Bench of the High Court in any manner. We, therefore, without going into
further details, allow this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and
order of the Letters Patent Bench and restore that of the learned Single
Judge without any order as to costs.
R.P. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.