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