Summary
In arbitration governed by an agreement requiring an award within four months and extension only by both parties’ consent, the Court held that the arbitrator’s mandate had terminated when time expired. The appellants had expressly refused extension before expiry. Their earlier participation did not establish waiver. The Court set aside rejection of their section 14 petition, leaving the claimants free to pursue remedies available in law.
Issues
- Whether expiry of the agreed four-month period without mutual consent terminated the arbitrator’s mandate.
- Whether participation before expiry waived the right to insist on the contractual time limit.
Provisions considered
- Sections 14 and 15, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996Applied to termination of the mandate upon expiry of the binding contractual period without the consent required for extension; the disputed termination could be placed before the court under section 14(2). (¶¶ 15–19, 23)
Held
- The agreement bound the arbitrator to make the award within four months, extendable only with both parties’ consent. The period expired on 4 September 2007; the appellants had refused extension, and the claimants had not obtained the suggested clarification or extension from the Supreme Court. (¶¶ 4–8, 13–16)
- The arbitrator was bound by the agreed procedure and could not enlarge that period without the necessary consent. Upon its expiry the mandate terminated, and the appellants properly sought a judicial determination under section 14. (¶¶ 16–19, 23)
- Waiver requires voluntary and intentional relinquishment and depends on the facts, conduct and agreement. Participation while time remained, followed by an express objection before expiry, did not justify the High Court’s finding of waiver in this case. (¶ 19–23)
- The appeal was allowed and the High Court decision set aside, reserving the respondents’ liberty to pursue grievances as legally admissible. (¶ 24–25)
Result
Appeal allowed without costs; High Court order dated 14 March 2008 set aside. Arbitrator’s mandate held terminated after expiry of the contractual period on 4 September 2007. Respondents left free to pursue remedies admissible in law.