MUHAMMAD NADEEM versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BHAKKAR
Section 20, 30, 34 and 39 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), Section 73 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Sections 42 and 54 of the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Application and Permanent Order for Prohibition Object Intelligence Plaintiff, who was a distributor of the plaintiff company and its distributor was terminated by the defendant, announced during the litigation and the arbitral order that the plaintiff filed arbitration to resolve the dispute through arbitration. Filed an application under section 34. With the consent of the parties to a clause of the agreement, the trial court referred the matter to the arbitrator, the two parties jointly testifying before the arbitrator that they would follow the award given by the arbitrator after the parties' hearing, the arbitrator's arrest Has the right to receive Rs 16,49,033 as compensation, no objection was made by the plaintiff to the arbitrator's credit or jurisdiction over the jurisdiction of the arbitrator. No objection was raised when the arbitration award was taken and the announcement was made by the plaintiff company seeing the award as offensive. Let's raise some objections in this regard. Until the scope of reference for the resolution of the dispute, at this stage, the plaintiff of the justification could not be allowed to make any identification, whatever the order of reference or the jurisdiction of the arbitrator when the plaintiff appeared before the arbitrator. On this issue, the defendant had ample opportunity to raise the objection that there was no scope of reference nor did the agreement allow for the award of damages, but the defendant had done so. As failed, Contract Act 1
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
