Full and final discharge voucher bars arbitration absent prima facie proof of coercion, fraud, or undue influence.

A voluntary full and final discharge voucher ordinarily concludes an insurance claim by accord and satisfaction, and arbitration cannot be invoked on a bare assertion that the settlement was induced by coercion, fraud, or undue influence. The party challenging the discharge must produce prima facie material showing that the settlement was not voluntary and that a live dispute still survives. In the absence of such material, Section 11(6A) does not require appointment of an arbitrator. On the facts, the challenge to the discharge was belated and unsupported, so the settlement was treated as binding and appointment of an arbitrator was unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether a claim settled through a signed discharge voucher and letter of subrogation could still be referred to arbitration on a later allegation that the settlement was obtained by coercion or undue influence, and whether the Court could appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the absence of prima facie material showing a live dispute.

Analysis: A full and final settlement, followed by acceptance of payment and execution of a discharge voucher, ordinarily brings the contract to an end by accord and satisfaction. A mere assertion that the discharge was procured by coercion, fraud, or undue influence is not sufficient by itself to justify reference to arbitration. The party making such allegation must place prima facie material to show that the discharge was not voluntary and that a bona fide dispute still survives. Section 11(6A) does not compel appointment of an arbitrator where the record shows that the claim has already been finally settled and no subsisting arbitral dispute is demonstrably shown. On the facts, the challenge to the discharge was raised belatedly and was unsupported by any prima facie evidence.

Conclusion: The settlement was held to be binding and voluntary, no arbitral dispute survived for adjudication, and appointment of an arbitrator was unwarranted.

Final Conclusion: The order appointing the arbitrator was set aside and the appeals succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A settled insurance claim evidenced by a voluntary full and final discharge bars arbitration unless the party challenging the discharge produces prima facie material showing that the settlement was obtained by fraud, coercion, or undue influence and that a real dispute survives.

---