IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2295 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision 21.03.2009 Executive Engineer, Punjab ......Petitioner VERSUS Smt.Raj Gupta and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL. Present: Mr.Gurcharan Dass, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J (ORAL): The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 27.01.2006, passed by Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana. After hearing the arguments at length, it appears that award dated 31.03.1989, passed by the Arbitrator, which was made the rule of the Court by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, having been passed in the absence of the respondents-L.Rs of Tirath Ram. The learned Appellate Court has set aside the award on the grounds that no intimation was given to the L.Rs. of Tirath Ram regarding the appointment of the Arbitrator and no notice was issued by the Arbitrator to them. Therefore, the award was against the principles of natural justice and fair play. However, the learned Appellate Court set aside the impugned judgment dated 21.07.2003 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana and set aside the award dated 31.03.1989 passed by the Arbitrator, it was further directed that the respondents would be at liberty to proceed further in the matter in accordance with the rules and law. Civil Revision No.2295 of 2008(O&M) -2- The only prayer made by the petitioner before me is that in case the impugned judgment is maintained and the award passed by the Arbitrator are set aside then in order to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, Arbitrator was required to be directed to pass a fresh order after summoning and affording opportunity to the parties. The petitioner feels satisfied if such directions are issued. The Appellate Court never placed an embargo over Arbitrator to pass a fresh award after hearing the parties. In any way, such direction would not mean difficulty. In view of what has been stated above, this revision petition is dismissed. However, the Arbitrator would be at liberty to resolve the dispute between the parties after summoning and awarding full opportunity of having been heard. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 19.03.2009 mamta-II