Miss Lucy
← All judgments

M/S. Kashmir Electric And Hardware Corporation vs State Of Jammu And Kashmir

Supreme Court26 July 1996M.M. Punchhi · K Venkataswami

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an arbitrator conducts proceedings in premises owned by one party and accepts refreshments from that party, misconduct cannot be presumed merely from these facts where: (i) both contesting parties equally shared use of the premises and refreshments; (ii) no objection was raised by any party at any point during the proceedings regarding either the venue or the courtesies extended; and (iii) there is no evidence that the arbitrator was thereby corrupted or biased in the conduct of the arbitration.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

PETITIONER:M/S. KASHMIR ELECTRIC AND HARDWARE CORPORATION
Vs.
RESPONDENT:STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/07/1996
BENCH:PUNCHHI, M.M.BENCH:PUNCHHI, M.M.VENKATASWAMI K. (J)
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 1996Present:

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi Hon'ble Mr.Justice K.Venkataswami D.D.Thakur, Sr.Adv. and Rajeev Sharma, Adv. with him for the appellant Ashok Mathur, Adv. forth the Respondent O R D E R The following Order of the Court was delivered:

M/s. Kashmir Electric and Hardware Corporation V. State of Jammu and Kashmir O R D E R Leave granted.

We have before us the judgment of the learned single Judge of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court holding that the Arbitrator had not misconducted himself or the proceedings. We also have before us the appellate judgment of the Letters Patent Bench under appeal saying to the contrary. The misconduct blown up is that the Arbitrator had conducted sitting/sittings in the premises owned by the appellants and had during that while accepted tea and refreshment from them and hence to have become guilty of misconduct. It is admitted that he was not alone in that regard as both the contesting parties before him had equally shared the use of the premises for the purpose as well as refreshments as part of courtesies. No objection of any sort, at any point of time, was taken by any one either with regard to the place of conduct of the proceedings or to those courtesies extended in the form of refreshments. We fail to appreciate as to how could the arbitrator be presumed to have corrupted himself in accepting those courtesies, in these facts and circumstances. Mr. Ashok Mathur, learned counsel appearing for the State of Jammu and Kashmir is candid enough to state that he is unable to support the decision of the Letters Patent Bench of the High Court in any manner. We, therefore, without going into further details, allow this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order of the Letters Patent Bench and restore that of the learned Single Judge without any order as to costs.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free