-Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.73---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition--- Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--- Arbitration proceedings--- Award, objection to--- Damages---Entitlement

 2012 CLC 441

Ss. 42 & 54---Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Ss.20, 30, 34 & 39----Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.73---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition--- Suit for declaration and permanent injunction--- Arbitration proceedings--- Award, objection to--- Damages---Entitlement ---Plaintiff who was distributor of defendant-company, his distributorship having been terminated by defendant, he filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction---Defendant, during pendency of suit, filed an application under S.34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for settlement of dispute through arbitration as provided in one of the clauses of the agreement---With consent of the parties, Trial Court referred the matter to arbitrator---Both the parties made a joint statement before the arbitrator that they would abide by the award made by the arbitrator---After hearing the parties, the arbitrator held the plaintiff entitled to get amount of Rs.16,49,033 as damages---No objection was raised by defendant before the arbitrator with regard to scope of reference or upon the jurisdiction of the arbitrator---Parties raised no objection on the credibility or jurisdiction of the arbitrator---When arbitrator award was made and announced, the defendant-company, seeing the award unfavourable to it, took certain objections with regard to scope of reference for determination of the dispute---Validity---Defendant, at that stage could not be allowed to point out any lacuna, whatsoever in the order of reference or the jurisdiction of the arbitrator---When the plaintiff submitted his claim for damages before the arbitrator who also framed issues on that point, ample opportunity was available to the defendant to take objections that neither scope of reference nor agreement allowed the award of damages, but defendant completely failed to do so---Under S.73 of the Contract Act, 1872, damages could be claimed even if there was no clause in the agreement---Award of the arbitrator was in accordance with law and same could not be set aside---Courts below were not justified in law while setting aside the award---Constitutional petition filed by the plaintiff was allowed and impugned judgments passed by courts below were set aside, in circumstances.