Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.42 seconds)The Union Of India (Uoi) vs Premchand Satram Das And Anr. on 11 May, 1951
As pointed out in Union of India v. Premchand. Satram Das, AIR 1951 Pat 201 even if the award is badly stated without giving reasons for it, it cannot be assailed even if it be against facts or repugnant to law. Doubtless errors of law on the face of the award may make it vulnerable unless it can be further shown that the parties agreed to refer the question of law also to the arbitrator for his final decision.
Pannalal Paul And Ors. vs Sm. Padmabati Paul And Ors. on 15 June, 1960
To a similar effect is a recent decision of the Calcutta High Court reported in Pannalal v. Sm. Padmabati, AIR 1960 Cal 693 (696) where it was held that the arbitrator was not bound to make a separate and distinct finding on each issue in controversy between the parties.
Section 17 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 39 in The Arbitration Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Sreelal Mangtulal vs J.F. Madan on 20 June, 1924
The Arbitrator is also not bound to give reasons for his award, or to state why and how he came to his conclusion. On the contrary the giving of reasons would be an invitation to a party to embark upon further litigation--see Sreelal v. J. F. Madan, ILR 52 Cal 100: (AIR 1925 Cal 599).
1