http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5
PETITIONER: PAYYAVULA VENGAMMA
Vs.
RESPONDENT: PAYYAVULA KESANNA AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/10/1952
BENCH: BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. BENCH: BHAGWATI, NATWARLAL H. MUKHERJEA, B.K. AIYAR, N. CHANDRASEKHARA
CITATION: 1953 AIR 21 1953 SCR 119 CITATOR INFO : R 1990 SC1426 (22)
ACT: Arbitration--Arbitrator takiny statement from one party in the absence of the other-Legal misconduct-Validity of award- Question of prejudice,
HEADNOTE: Where, in an arbitration under s. 21 of the Indian Arbitration Act, the arbitrator took statements from each of the parties in the absence of the other and made an award: Held, that it is one of the elementary principles of the administration of justice, whether by courts or by arbitration by lawyers or merchants, that a party should not be allowed to use any means whatsoever to influence 120 the mind of the judge or arbitrator, which means, are not known to and capable of being met and resisted by the other party; the arbitrator was accordingly guilty of legal misconduct; and this was sufficent to vitiate the award, irrespective of the fact whether this misconduct bad caused prejudice to any one. Harvey v. Shelton (1844) 7 Beav. 455, Ganesh Narayan Singh v. Malida Koer (1911) 13 Cal. L.J. 399, and Haigh v. Haigh (1861) 31 L.J. Ch. 420, referred to.
JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appea...