AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Y.V. Narayana, J.—The short question that arises for consideration in this Revision Petition is - whether the matter could be referred to arbitration relying on Clause 50 of the Charterparty.
The facts in brief are :
There was a Charterparty entered into between the shipowner (1st respondent herein) and the President of India. The revision petitioner, which is an endorsee of the bill of lading, raised a claim for Rupees two lakhs and odd, alleging that there was shortage in the delivery of goods and appointed an Arbitrator on its behalf, involving Clause 50 of the Charterparty. The first respondent - ship-owner filed the O.P. u/s 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act for a finding whether there is any arbitration clause existing between the parties. The lower Court held that there is no arbitration clause/agreement between the parties and the petitioner herein cannot, therefore, go in for arbitration. Aggrieved by the same, the present Revision Petition is filed.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the lower Court erred in allowing the O.P. inasmuch as there is a clause in the bill of lading which makes all the terms and conditions, incorporated in the Charterparty, operative between the parties and there is an arbitration clause (Clause 50) in the Charterparty and therefore, the matter is referable to an Arbitrator.
In the bill of lading there is a clause to the following effect :
"All terms and conditions of relevant Charterparty are deemed to have been incorporated there under"
Clause 50 of the Charterparty reads as under :
"All disputes arising under this Charter shall be settled in India in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940 of India, each party appointing an Arbitrator from out of the panel of Arbitrators maintained by the Indian Council of Arbitration, New Delhi, and the two Arbitrators appointing an Umpire, whose decision in the event of disagreement between the Arbitrators, shall be final and binding upon both parties hereto. The Arbitrators and Umpire shall be commercial men."
A combined reading of the abovementioned two clauses makes it crystal clear that whatever conditions are incorporated in the Charterparty shall be operative between the parties to the bill of lading. Clause 50 of the Charterparty which clearly envisages for appointment of an Arbitrator in the event of a dispute arising between the parties, shall be deemed to have been incorporated in the bill of lading itself. There is no necessity that there should be specific clause of arbitration in the bill of lading itself. In the judgment in Temperley Steam Shipping Company v. Smith & Co. 1905(2) KB 791, the King''s Bench has held that where the parties to the Charterparty and the bill of lading are one and the same and there is a stipulation in the bill of lading that ''all other conditions as per Charterparty'', it has to be presumed that the conditions of the Charterparty must be read verbatim into the bill of lading as though they were there printed in extenso. In such view of the matter, it has to be held that by virtue of Clause 50 of the Charterparty, which is deemed to have been incorporated in the bill of lading, the revision petition is entitled to seek for settlement of the dispute through an Arbitrator.
In view of the above, the judgment of the lower Court is set aside and the Revision Petition allowed.
Revision allowed.