https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159094 A contractual clause that merely gives a Superintending Engineer supervisory control and makes his decisions final on work-related questions does not amount to an arbitration agreement unless the contract clearly shows a reference of disputes to him for adjudication. Because Clause 22 contained no express or implied agreement to arbitrate and no provision referring disputes for decision, it could not sustain an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The clause was therefore treated as an administrative finality clause, not an arbitration clause, and the application was not maintainable. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jul 2020 12:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159094 A contractual clause that merely gives a Superintending Engineer supervisory control and makes his decisions final on work-related questions does not amount to an arbitration agreement unless the contract clearly shows a reference of disputes to him for adjudication. Because Clause 22 contained no express or implied agreement to arbitrate and no provision referring disputes for decision, it could not sustain an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The clause was therefore treated as an administrative finality clause, not an arbitration clause, and the application was not maintainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159094