INVALIDITY OF AGREEMENT
It is possible to dispute the validity of an arrangement on any of the grounds on which the validity of a contract can be questioned. In situations where an arbitration clause is included in a contract, if the contract is void, the arbitration clause will be invalid.
State of U.P. v. Allied Constructions
Court held that the legitimacy of an arrangement must be checked on the basis of the statute under which it has been subjected by the parties. If no such indication exists, the validity ofthe indication will be checked in compliance with the legislation in force.
NOTICE NOT GIVEN TO PARTIES
Section34(2)(iii) enables the award to be contested if the party has not been given adequate notice of the appointment of an arbitrator, or the party has not been given adequate notice of the arbitralproceedings, or the party has been unable to present its argument for such purposes. The Arbitral Tribunal shall decide, pursuant to Section 23(1), the period during which the statementsmust be filed. This decision must be conveyed by sufficient warning to the parties.
Section 24(2) requires that, for the purposes of examining records, products or other property, the parties be given ample advance notice of any hearing or meeting of the Tribunal.Whena party is prohibited from appearing and arguing its case to the Tribunal for any reasonable cause, the award would be liable to be set aside as the party is considered to have been deprived of the opportunity to hear the theory of natural justice.
In Dulal Podda v. Executive Engineer, Dona Canal Division
Court held that, at the request of the appellant, appointing an arbitrator without sending notice to the respondent, the arbitrator's ex parte award was unconstitutional and liable to be setaside.
"In Vijay Kumar v. Bathinda Central Cooperative Bank and ors the court noted "it is a typical case where the arbitrator misled the proceedings and misled himself as well. On May 17,2010, the arbitrator held the first and only hearing. No points were framed for resolution or problems. The bank has filed four workers affidavits.The opportunity for the appellant to Crossexamine them was not granted. The ability to produce proof was denied him. The provisions of law, procedure, and rules of justice were given a full go bye. It can also be seen that the appellant was not in a position to make his case.
This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1)(A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being.