Case: Union of India Vs. Messrs R. B. Ch. Raghunath Singh and Company

1. These two appeals by certificate arise out of the same proceedings between the parties. The respondent company applied to the trial Court for the filing of the arbitration agreement under Section 20 ofthe Arbitration Act, 1940 hereinafter called the Act and for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 8. The applications were allowed. An arbitrator was appointed. The Union of India took the matter in appeals to the Allahabad High Court. The High Court has dismissed the appeal arising out of the order of the trial Court under Section 20 of the Act and has treated the appeal arising out of Section 8 order as a revision and dismissed the same also. The Union of India has come to this Court

Court's reasoning:
We did not find any substance in this argument. The court had no power to supply the vacancy under Section 8(1)(b) only if the arbitration agreement did show that the parties did not intend to supply the vacancy. If no such intention could be called out from the arbitration clause, the court could supply theour opinion while considering the provisions of Section 8(1)(b) of the Act, that decision is of no help to the appellant. The Full Bench decision was given with reference to the corresponding provisions of law contained in Schedule II ofCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 in paragraph 5 whereof the crucial words occurring in Section 8(1)(b) of the Act were not there. The words in Section 8(1)(b) are these :"and arbitration agreement does not show that it was intended that the vacancy should not be supplied"