Knowledge of making of the award, if any, is not sufficient to fix one with the notice of making of the award within the meaning of Article 178 of the Limitation Act. Dhaka Leather Complex Ltd BCIC vs Sikder Construction Ltd and another 55 DLR 578.

Parties refer their dispute to arbitration to get an amicable settlement which is encouraged even though Arbitrators do not follow strict and delicate procedural technicalities. If any party has lack of confidence in the Arbitrator he may seek his removal in accordance with law. Messrs Rising Sun Traders vs Chittagong Port Authority 43 DLR 1.

The scheme of section 12, particularly of sub-section (2) thereof, clothes the court with the authority of appointing an arbitrator in its discretion after the parties fail to nominate a common arbitrator. Bangladesh Water Development Board vs Zakir Construction and Co and another 48 DLR 261.

E.x parte decision in arbitration proceeding-Powers of the Arbitrator-The respondent Port Authority did not appear before the Arbitrator at all nor did they express their intention to appear on receiving notice from the Arbitrator. In such circumstances the Arbitrator is not bound to give them notice about ex parte hearing and passing of ex parte award in the arbitration proceeding before him. Messrs Rising Sun Traders Ltd vs Chittagong Port Authority. 43 DLR 1.

The learned Subordinate Judge, without following the mandatory provisions of section 14 of the Act, fell in serious error of law in pronouncing the judgment. The decree followed such judgment must be held to be clearly in excess of the award. The appeal from such decree is therefore quite competent and must succeed. Titas Gas Transmission and Distribution Co. Ltd vs Shams Company and others 54 DLR 128.

Forfeiture of insurance claim­ - The arbitration agreement contained in the insurance policy in question provided that if a claim be made and rejected and an action be not commenced within 3 months after such rejection all benefits under the policy shall be forfeited. The Insurance Company having informed the plaintiff that their claims under the policy were not payable and, as such, rejected the same as per condition No. 13 of the policy and the plaintiff having not commenced any action within 3 months, have forfeited all their rights under the policy. Sadharan Bima Corporation vs Dhaka Dyeing & Manufacturing Co Ltd 43 DLR 286.

Arbitration award-It cannot be challenged by way of a suit-Once an award is made and it is filed in Court for making it the Rule of the Court, no suit can be filed for the purpose of avoiding the award. Remedy to the party desiring to challenge the validity of an arbitration agreement or the award itself is as provided in section 33. Shafiqur Rahman vs Nazmul Hossain Khan 44 DLR 428.

Objection against the maintainability of the suit must be raised at the very preliminary stage of the proceeding even before taking any step for filing written statement. This having not been done, the trial Court's decree is set aside with a direction to write out a judgment on consideration of materials on record. Nur Nabi Chowdhury vs Bangladesh Krishi Bank 46DLR 509.

In order to hold an arbitration proceeding invalid notice of the legal proceeding must be given to the Arbitrator. Adamjee Sons Ltd vs Jiban Bima Corporation 45 DLR 89.

Where an arbitration agreement provides that a claim shall be barred unless it is referred to arbitration within certain time the Court is empowered to interfere if it is of the opinion that in the circumstances of the case undue hardship would otherwise be caused to a party. Sadharan Bima Corporation vs The Dhaka Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Ltd 43 DLR 286.

An Arbitrator exercises a quasi-judicial function. He is both a judge of law and of fact and hence a pure question of law whether the executive authority acted beyond power could be a matter of arbitration reference.
The law in this regard is also well settled that when parties to building construction or supply of goods and the like designate a person to be authorised to finally determine question relating to the execution or non-execution as per terms of the contract and stipulated that the decision of the person shall be final and binding on both the parties, it would be binding except in cases of fraud, gross mistake on his part, as would imply an act of bad faith or failure to exercise an honest judgment on grounds of collusion with the other party or an act of misconduct. AIR 1975 (Madhya Pradesh) 152. Coal Controller vs Ventura Industries Ltd 46 DLR 5.

After the final decision in the suit and in this appeal therefrom, it is very difficult for us to appreciate the submissions of Mr Rafiqnr Rahman that in view of the arbitration agreement having remained alive, the suit is not maintainable. Moreover, we find no such provisions in the Act barring a suit on the ground of existence of an arbitration agreement. Bangladesh Water Development Board vs Contractor, Manu Barrage 53 DLR 200.