Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD)



Arbitration Act, 1950 (English)
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation Head Note Parties Name Reference/Citation
Sections 3 and 28

Enlargement of time (beyond 4 months) for giving the award by consent of the both parties, permissible-Such enlargement of time may be provided for in the agreement-In the absence of such agreement consent may be inferred by conduct of parties. Government of Bangladesh vs Jalaluddin Ahmed 37 DLR (AD) 27.

Government of Bangladesh vs Jalaluddin Ahmed 37 DLR (AD) 27
Section 8

Objection against appointment of Arbitrator who he has already entered on the reference following unacceptable - Conduct displayed by the objector appears to be a technical objection not entertainable at a belated stage. Coal Controller, Government of Bangladesh vs Ventura Industries Ltd 44 DLR (AD) 183.

Coal Controller, Government of Bangladesh vs Ventura Industries Ltd. 44 DLR (AD) 183
Sections 8, 30 & 33

Arbitration­ Conclusiveness of award-The work order given to the tenderer became an instrument necessary for understanding the contract with him. Though not a part of the contract itself it is a contemporaneous document accepted by both sides throwing light on the interpretation of schedule of work. Mohammad Eunus and Brothers (Pvt) Ltd vs University of Chittagong 44 DLR (AD) 296.

Mohammad Eunus and Brothers (Pvt) Ltd vs University of Chittagong 44 DLR (AD) 296
Sections 17, 33 & 39(1)(vi)

Arbitration award-Question of setting aside an award- The appellants did not file any application to set aside the award or to challenge the existence and validity of the award. It is absurd to say that by making the award a Rule of the Court, the Court has refused to set aside the award. The act of refusal must be in pursuance of a positive move by the party affected either under section 17 or section 33. An ex parte order, as in the present case, making an award the Rule of the Court is not amenable to under section 39 of the Arbitration Act. Bangladesh vs KM Shafi Ltd 43 DLR (AD) 217.

Bangladesh vs KM Shafi Ltd 43 DLR (AD) 217
Section 29

Interest for the future, that is, from the date of the award till realisation of the money through section 29 of the Arbitration Act, did not give the Arbitrator this power, he may allow interest on his award till realisation on the same analogy to court's power. This will be in accord with justice and fairness. BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd 46 DLR (AD) 97.

BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 97
Section 29

In the absence of agreement the arbitrator or umpire has no jurisdiction to grant interest on awarded amount till relisation. But the Court has jurisdiction in its discretion to grant interest on the awarded amount or part thereof till realisation. Asamat Zaman (Md) and others vs Government of Bangladesh and others 55 DLR (AD) 139.

Asamat Zaman (Md) and others vs Government of Bangladesh and others 55 DLR (AD) 139
Section 30

Misconduct on the part of the arbitrators may be a ground for setting aside their award. But such misconduct, when not agitated in the trial Court, could not be raised afresh before the superior Courts. Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board vs Lithi Enterprises Ltd 50 DLR (AD) 63.

Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board vs Lithi Enterprises Ltd 50 DLR (AD) 63
Sections 30 and 33

Pendente lite interest -An arbitrator may allow pendente lite interest on the analogy of court's power to grant interest if the disputes were agitated before it.
The Arbitrator may allow interest pendente lite for a period beyond four months if the prolongation of the proceeding is caused by circumstances beyond his control. Again, to avoid any controversy, the period for pendente lite interest will start from the date on which the Arbitrator enters upon the arbitration proceedings and end on the day the award is made. BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd 46 DLR (AD) 97.

BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 97
Sections 30 and 33

Arbitrator's power to award interest-Interest as to pre-reference period-In the absence of any law or agreement providing for payment of interest by an Arbitrator it will not be proper to vest in him power to award interest for the pre-reference. BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd 46 DLR (AD) 97.

BADC vs Kibria & Associates Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 97
Sections 32 and 33

A suit to challenge the existence of an arbitration agreement or an award is not maintainable by reason of section 33 which provides that such a challenge must be made by means of an application and not by means of a suit. Badsha Miah & others vs Abdul Kader and others 52 DLR (AD) 79.

Badsha Miah & others vs Abdul Kader and others 52 DLR (AD) 79
Sections 33 and 30

Arbitrator's power to award interest-Interest as to pre-reference period-In the absence of any law or agreement providing for payment of interest by an Arbitrator it will not be proper to vest in him power to award interest for the pre-reference. Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation vs Kibria and Associates Ltd 46 DLR (AD) 97.

Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation vs Kibria and Associates Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 97
Sections 33 and 30

Pendente lite interest-An arbitrator may allow pendente lite interest on the analogy of court's power to grant interest if the disputes were agitated before it. Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation vs Kibria and Associates Ltd 46 DLR (AD) 97.

Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation vs Kibria and Associates Ltd. 46 DLR (AD) 97
Section 39

It is not permissible in law to grant interest on the decretal amount of the award in appeal when no such interest was awarded by the arbitrators and no such claim was made by the respondent before the court which made the award rule of the court. Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Mineral Corporation (Petro-Bangla) vs Nuruzzaman Khan and others 51 DLR (AD) 52.

Bangladesh Oil, Gas and Mineral Corporation (Petro-Bangla) vs Nuruzzaman Khan and others 51 DLR (AD) 52

Arbitration Act, 1950 read with Clause 14 of the Agreement dated 18.4.80
Clause 14 of the agreement is held to be a composite whole, a self-contained indivisible covenant, having a meaning and content in its totality. Clause 14 is an arbitration clause stipulating not only that the parties shall submit all their disputes to arbitration but also that the arbitration shall be “in accordance with, and subject to the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1950”. [Per Mustafa Kamal J.]
Bangladesh Air Service (Pv.) Ltd. vs. British Airways PLC, 17 BLD (AD) 249
Bangladesh Courts and English Law
It is true that Bangladesh Courts often follow the English Law when there is no municipal law on the subject, as in the field of Marine Insurance, but in the English Arbitration Act, 1950, the procedural law includes the forum for administration of the procedure and it is a poor defence to say that clause 14 has not settled the venue of arbitration. If the arbitration “is in accordance with, and subject to, the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1950”, the parties do not have to travel far to look out for the venue beyond the Arbitration Act, 1950. [Per Mustafa Kamal, J.1
Bangladesh Air Service (Pv.) Ltd. vs. British Airways PLC, 17 BLD (AD) 249

Bangladesh Air Service (Pv.) Ltd. vs. British Airways PLC, 17 BLD (AD) 249