GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. versus JAN CONSTRUCTION CO.
Section 14, 17 and 39 governed by the award of the court, the contract between the authority and the construction company was completed, but the payment was not made to the company accordingly, the matter was referred to the arbitrators. The two arbitrators of the agreement announced the award, which was presented to the court as a rule of court, as no comment was made on the authenticity of the award, the same rule of the court was justified, the court said. Was obliged to consider all validation questions. The award, both legally and also in its factual aspects, may, under the law, refuse to make the award the role of the court, or it may identify the defects in the award and return it to the arbitrator; all such exercises on the same basis. Should be. Reasons were not just a mechanical process that enters an award at one end of the machine and the partner endorsed at the other end. Regarding the award, the URT was not valid under a court-ruled shortcut law, the trial court did not even bother to look at the award to decide what to consider to consider its authenticity. The decision of the judge and the judge cannot be retained. The court was set aside and the trial was adjourned to the trial court for a pre-trial trial, but not after a month, according to pre-existing law.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
