Sukhwant Rai v. Justice D.V. Sehgal (Retd.) (SC)
BS189816
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Before:- S.B. Majmudar and M. Jagannadha Rao, JJ.
Civil Appeal No. 3595 of 1988, Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4518 of 1998. D/d.
3.8.1998.
Sukhwant Rai - Appellant
Versus
Justice D.V. Sehgal (Retd.) and others - Respondents
ORDER
S.B. Majmudar, J. - Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as Respondents 2 and 3 who are the main contesting parties. So far as Respondent 1 is concerned, he is the learned arbitrator, a retired Judge of the High Court, who was appointed as an arbitrator in the present case. The grievance of the appellant before the High Court was that he had no faith in the arbitrator for the grounds raised before the High Court. The learned Judge of the High Court by the impugned order overruled these objections with the result that the appointed arbitrator continued to arbitrate. That is how the appellant came before us. While issuing notice on the SLP, we granted ad interim stay of further proceedings before the learned arbitrator, Respondent 1. During the pendency of these proceedings, learned counsel for the appellant fairly stated that he gives up all his allegations against the arbitrator. Respondent 1-arbitrator on the other hand also took a fair stand that he does not want to continue as an arbitrator. In view of these developments, therefore, we are not called upon to consider whether the allegations earlier made against the arbitrator were justified or not. The result is that the appointed arbitrator, Shri D.V. Sehgal, now, is not going to pass any award as he has resigned as arbitrator in this case. Under these circumstances, the appeal is allowed only to the limited extent that the order passed by the learned trial Judge continuing Respondent 1-arbitrator any further will not survive as Respondent 1 himself has resigned as an arbitrator. Whatever further course may be open to both the sides in accordance with law will not stand affected by the present order. We may mention that the learned counsel for Respondents 2 and 3 submitted that once the appointed arbitrator has resigned, a new arbitrator will have to be appointed as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the appeal in which the arbitrator was appointed would not survive any further. Learned counsel for the appellant on the other hand joined issues and submitted that under these circumstances, the appeal can be heard on merits. We express no opinion on these rival contentions. It will be for the appropriate court, if at all seized of the matter, to consider these grievances.
3. Appeal disposed of accordingly.
Appeal allowed.