FAO No. 1876 of 2008 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on August 11,2010. Executive Engineer, Provincial Divn. PWD, (B&R),Branch Ludhiana --Appellant vs. M/s Bhullar Constructions Co and another -- Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.R.L.Gupta Addl.A.G.Punjab, with Mr.Vibhu Raj Jhanji,Advocate, for the appellant Ms.Deepali Puri,Advocate,for the respondents. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, (Oral) This appeal is directed against the order dated 05.4.2008 passed by learned District Judge, Ludhiana, dismissing the objections by the appellant filed under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Act) against arbitral award dated 31.10.2006. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant had filed voluminous record alongwith objection under Section 34 in order to challenge the award of the Arbitrator on various grounds including personal bias of the Arbitrator. It is submitted that the Court below has erred in law in not framing appropriate issues and allowing the parties to lead evidence to prove the same. In support of his FAO No. 1876 of 2008 2 submission, learned counsel has referred to the Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh Arbitration and Conciliation Rules, 2003,which have been framed under Section 82 of the Act and has also relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Amrik Singh and another Vs.Vardhan Properties and Investment Ltd 2006 (4) R.C.R Civil) 521. In reply, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the award of the Arbitrator calls for no interference and the order passed by learned District Judge, Ludhiana in accordance with law even if the issues have not been framed, but he has decided the objections after discussing the possible issues arising there in under different heads calling it to be 'points of determination'. I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record with their assistance. It is a case where both the parties have alleged variety of facts. Therefore, in my view, according to Order 14 of CPC and also as per the rules, referred to above, the learned District Judge, should have framed appropriate issues on the pleadings of the parties and thereafter granted opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence in order to prove those issues before taking final decision in respect of the validity of the arbitral award. In view thereof without going into the merits of the case, the present appeal is allowed and the order ot the learned District Judge, Ludhiana, dated 05.04.2008 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Learned District Judge, Ludhiana to decide the objections filed under Section 34 of the Act, after framing issues and giving opportunities to FAO No. 1876 of 2008 3 both the parties to lead their evidence, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order as the matter with regard to arbitration is already 12 years old. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Ludhiana on 23.8.2010. August 11,2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge