Civil Revision No. 1877 of 2006 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1877 of 2006 Date of decision: 19.4.2010 M/s Standard Barrel Supplies ...Petitioner Versus Punjab Small Industries & Export Corporation Ltd. and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Shammi Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pardeep Bhandari, Advocate for the respondents S.D.ANAND, J. In terms of a consensual documented arbitration clause, controversy between the parties was referred to the Arbitrator who gave the award dated 10.9.1996. The respondent-Corporation filed a plea before the learned Trial Court for the award being made a rule of the Court. The plea came to be allowed by the learned Trial Court, vide order dated 20.3.2002. The order granted by the learned Trial Court came to be affirmed by the learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, vide order dated 8.10.2005. The petitioner herein has applied for the invalidation of the order dated 20.3.2002 granted by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh and order dated 8.10.2005 granted by learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the award Civil Revision No. 1877 of 2006 -2- **** given by the Arbitrator was invalid because the initially appointed Arbitrator put in his papers from the post of the Managing Director and the arbitration came to be conducted by his successor. The plea raised thereby is that the successor of the initially appointed Arbitrator could not have proceeded with the arbitration proceedings. The plea raised is completely denuded of merit. The reasons therefor are as under:- It is common ground that the appointment of the initial arbitrator had been made by designation. If the incumbent of that office moved out, for one reason or the other, it would not disable his successor from proceeding with the arbitration proceedings which, as already noticed came to be assigned to his predecessor by designation. No other plea has been raised. In the light of foregoing discussion, the petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. Disposed of accordingly. April 19, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge