| Case ID |
3cc4fdc2-fb0c-4235-9daa-db2e7e10ff68 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
First Appeal from Order No. 40 of 1996 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 20, 1997 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The appeal was dismissed based on the findings that the arbitration clause in the agreement dated 9-8-1988 was vague, uncertain, and could not be the basis for referring any disputes to arbitration. The court emphasized that a valid arbitration agreement must specify the disputes to be referred, and in this case, the agreement failed to define any such definite area of dispute. The decision concluded that the learned Civil Judge was correct in his assessment, and no exception could be taken to the view that the arbitration clause was insufficient to warrant a stay of proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. |
| Summary |
In the case before the Lahore High Court, the appellant, Messrs Hohnson and Phillips (Pakistan) Ltd., sought to invoke an arbitration clause from an agreement dated 9-8-1988 in relation to a civil suit filed by the respondent Sahibzada Muhammad Ayaz. The appellant's request for a stay of proceedings based on the arbitration clause was denied by the Civil Judge, leading to this appeal. The court analyzed the arbitration clause, determining that it lacked the necessary specificity to define what disputes were subject to arbitration. The court referred to various precedents, affirming that an arbitration agreement must clearly outline the disputes to be arbitrated. The judgment highlighted that vague or indeterminate clauses cannot form the basis for arbitration, reinforcing the legal principle that clarity is essential in contractual agreements, especially those involving arbitration. The decision to dismiss the appeal was based on the lack of a valid arbitration agreement as required by the Arbitration Act, 1940, thus underscoring the importance of precise language in legal contracts. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Messrs HOHNSON AND PHILLIPS (PAKISTAN) LTD.,
Sahibzada MUHAMMAD AYAZ
|
| Judges |
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J
|
| Lawyers |
Fazal-e-Hussain,
Samad Mahmood
|
| Petitioners |
Messrs HOHNSON AND PHILLIPS (PAKISTAN) LTD.
|
| Respondents |
,
Sahibzada MUHAMMAD AYAZ
|
| Citations |
1997 SLD 762,
1997 CLC 1177
|
| Other Citations |
Pakistan International Airlines Corporation v. Messrs Pak Saaf Dry Cleaners PLD 1981 SC 553,
Printers (Mysore) (Private) Ltd. v. Pothan Joseph AIR 1960 SC 1156,
Anjuman Faizul Islam (Regd.), Rawalpindi through Secretary v. Messrs Building Artisans Ltd. and another PLD 1994 Lah. 122,
Universal Life & General Insurance Co. Ltd. Lahore v. Ejaz Mahmood PLD 1978 Lah. 475,
Abdul Qayyum Khan v. Government of Punjab through Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department and another PLD-1995 Lah. 205,
Messrs Eckhardt & Co. Marine GmbH v. Muhammad Hanif PLD 1993 SC 42,
Messrs Rupali Polyester Ltd. v. Dr. Nael G. Bunni and others PLD 1994 Lah. 525,
Amanullah Piracha and another v. Mrs. Tasneem Baig and another 1988 MLD 1552,
Heyman and another v. Darwins Ltd. (1942) 1 All ELR 337,
Middle East Trading Co. v. The New National Mills Ltd. AIR 1960 Bom. 292,
Ganesh Chandra Dey and another v. Kamal Kumar Agarwalla AIR 1971 Cal. 317,
Babu Lal Pardhan v. Badri Pardhan and another AIR 1919 Pat. 74,
In re: Srikrishan Kahanna & Brothers AIR 1934 Sind 29,
Luxmi Chand Baijnath v. Kishanlal Sohonlal AIR 1955 Cal. 588,
G. Scammel & Nephew v. H.C. & T.G. Oustan 1941 AC 251
|
| Laws Involved |
Arbitration Act (IX of 1940),
Contract Act (IX of 1872)
|
| Sections |
2(a),
34,
39,
29
|