Court: Lahore High Court, Lahore
Judge: Ch. Muhammad Masood Jahangir, J.
Case: Civil Revision No. 1908 of 2012
Date of Hearing: 30 April 2021
Result: Revision dismissed
Counsel for Respondent No. 1: Ms. Saba Saeed Sheikh, Advocate
Key Legal Issues
- Arbitration Agreement and proof of its execution
- Making an arbitration award a rule of Court
- Effect of failure to file objections against an award
- Burden of proving an arbitration/reference agreement
- Requirements for proving an attested document
- Scope of revisional jurisdiction under Section 115, C.P.C.
Judgment Summary
The Lahore High Court dismissed the civil revision petition challenging the concurrent judgments of the Courts below, whereby the petitioner’s request to make an arbitration award dated 02.11.2005 a rule of the Court had been rejected.
The petitioner claimed that the parties had entered into an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator to resolve their dispute concerning the subject land. However, the respondent denied having executed the alleged arbitration agreement and contended that the document relied upon by the petitioner was forged and fictitious.
The High Court held that the burden of proving the execution and genuineness of the arbitration agreement rested upon the petitioner, who had asserted its existence. The Court found several circumstances casting serious doubt upon the document, including deficiencies concerning its attestation and discrepancies relating to the stamp paper and the respondent’s thumb impression.
The Court further held that merely because the respondent had not filed objections to the arbitration award did not mean that the Courts were bound to automatically make the award a rule of the Court. The power of the Court in this regard is judicial rather than ministerial, and the Court remains responsible for scrutinizing the validity of the award.
The High Court also observed that the concurrent findings of the two Courts below did not suffer from misreading or non-reading of evidence or any jurisdictional defect warranting interference under Section 115, C.P.C. The scope of revisional jurisdiction is limited and does not permit the High Court to re-appraise factual findings merely because another view may be possible.
Accordingly, the civil revision was dismissed with costs of Rs.100,000/-.
Legal Principle
An arbitration award cannot automatically be made a rule of the Court merely because no objections have been filed against it. The Court has a judicial duty to scrutinize the award and the underlying arbitration agreement. Where the alleged arbitration agreement has not been duly proved, the award cannot be enforced merely on the basis of absence of objections.
Case Law Relied Upon:
- Messrs Awan Industries Ltd. v. The Executive Engineer, Lined Channel Division — 1992 SCMR 65
- Muhammad Tayab v. Akbar Hussain — 1995 SCMR 73
- Qutubuddin Khan v. Chief Mill Wala Dredging Co. (Pvt.) Limited — 2014 SCMR 1268
Disposition: Revision dismissed