Invalid arbitration reference can nullify the award where the court lacked jurisdiction to make the reference.

Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, the court's power under section 8(2) was limited to appointing an arbitrator or umpire when the parties failed to do so, and did not include a further jurisdiction to make a reference to that arbitrator. A reference made after such appointment was therefore incompetent. The Court also held that section 30(c) was broad enough to cover invalidity in the reference itself, so an award founded on a reference without jurisdiction was a nullity and could be set aside as otherwise invalid.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the court, after appointing an arbitrator under section 8(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, retained jurisdiction to make an order of reference to that arbitrator; (ii) Whether an award made on an invalid reference to arbitration could be set aside as being otherwise invalid under section 30(c) of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

Issue (i): Whether the court, after appointing an arbitrator under section 8(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940, retained jurisdiction to make an order of reference to that arbitrator.

Analysis: Section 8 empowers the court only to appoint an arbitrator or umpire where the parties fail to make the appointment. The Act separately provides in section 20(4) for an order of reference where the agreement is filed in court, but no similar power is conferred by section 8. The scheme of the Act shows that, in arbitration without court intervention, the proceedings move outside the court after appointment of the arbitrator, and the court does not retain a further power of reference under section 8(2).

Conclusion: The court had no jurisdiction, after appointing the arbitrator under section 8(2), to make an order referring the disputes to him.

Issue (ii): Whether an award made on an invalid reference to arbitration could be set aside as being otherwise invalid under section 30(c) of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

Analysis: Section 30(c) uses wide language permitting an award to be set aside if it is improperly procured or is otherwise invalid. That language was held broad enough to include invalidity in the reference itself. An award founded on a reference made without jurisdiction is a nullity, and the remedy under the Act permits challenge to such an award by application to the court.

Conclusion: An award made on an invalid reference is covered by section 30(c) and can be set aside as invalid.

Final Conclusion: The awards were nullities because the reference was incompetent, and the appeals were therefore dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute confers only a power to appoint an arbitrator, and not a separate power to refer the dispute, any reference made without jurisdiction is invalid, and an award founded on such a reference is liable to be set aside as a nullity under the provision permitting challenge to an award that is otherwise invalid.

---