Find a Lawyer

Suit No. 1044 of 1978, decided on 2nd October, 1980.

‑ S. 62‑Contract, alteration of‑Subsequent agreement only relating to some of terms of original agreement‑Held, both agreements to be read together to form a complete subsisting contract‑‑Original agreement not wiped out‑Remains in full force, subject to terms of second agreement‑Arbitration clause in dispute not superseded in subsequent agreement, continues to remain binding between parties. [Arbitration].

Balak Ram v. Telu A I R 1935 Lah. 897 ; Nagendranath Majumdar v. Kshitish Chandra Ghose P L D 1958 Dacca :79 ; Vishram Arjun v. Irukullah Shahkariah A I R 1957 Andh. Para. 784; Kadernath Lal v. Sheo Narayan Ram A I R 1957 Pat. 408 and Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works Ltd. v. General Iron and Steel Works Ltd. P L D 1971 Kar. 501 ref:

‑ S. 2(b)‑Arbitration agreement, requirements of‑Such agreement to be in writing‑Signatures of parties, held, not necessary.

Mst. Shamim Akhtar v. Mst. Najma Raqai P L D 19''''7 S C 644 ; Umed Sing v. Seth Sobhao Mal Dhadha I L R 43 Cal. 290 ; Shankar Lal Lachhami Narain v. Jainy Brothers I L R 43 All. 384 and Jugal Kishore Rameshwardas v. Mrs. Goolbai Hormusji A I R 1955 S C 812 ref.

‑‑ S. 28, Explanation I‑Arbitration‑Contention that arbitration clause having placed restraint on parties to avail legal remedies in ordinary Courts by way of civil suits, become void‑Held: Without force and agreement between parties to refer disputes to arbitration perfectly valid and not coming within mischief of S. 28.‑[Arbitration].

S. 20(4)‑Application‑Arbitration agreement between parties existing‑Defendants taking up position of non‑existence of such agree ment‑Application under S. 10, held, maintainable.

Habibur Rehman for Plaintiff.

Syed Sarfraz Ahmad, Asstt. A.‑G. for Defendants.

Date of hearing : 22nd September, 1980.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.