LILLEY INTERNATIONAL (PVT) LTD. versus NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY
Section 2 (c) and 14 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VII, R 10 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Suitability of the Court's jurisdiction to file arbitration award in court for the return of the award The contract between the plaintiff company and the plaintiff authority was entered into place in the contract agreement, where the defendants' head office was located, and it was stated that the contract contained a mediation clause that covers the scope and scope of work between the parties. There was a dispute in the series. Originally the plaintiff was sued by an arbitrator who resided on K. The arbitrator found it easy to take the arbitration proceedings on the spot with the consent of the parties, and at the request of the plaintiff the arbitrator presented the award with a record in accordance with section 14 of the arbitration act 1940. The Defendant's Authority filed a petition for the return of the award under Oh VI, R 10, CPC on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction to hear and entertain the case. In order to return the award and send it to the court of competent jurisdiction, the advice I gave to the defendant / applicant was to claim that the arbitrator should, in fact, go to his place. At the request of the arbitrator and solely for its convenience, the place of action was placed on K, which was unjustified. Arbitration Claims The provisions of the Court were not specifically stated in relation to the arbitration proceedings, under section 2 (c) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, which is the question of the court having jurisdiction over the matter relating to arbitration Where the arbitrator lives or works for the benefit, or where the arbitration proceedings take place.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
