https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160435 Clause 25 did not amount to an arbitration agreement because Section 2(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 requires a written agreement to submit present or future disputes to arbitration, and this clause only gave the Public Health Engineer final decision-making power on specifications, workmanship, materials, and related matters. Read as a whole, the clause created an administrative role rather than a reference to an arbitrator, so finality of the Engineer's decision could not by itself imply arbitration. The limitation question on the facts could not cure the absence of an arbitration agreement. No dispute or difference under the contract was therefore referable to arbitration. en-us Fri, 15 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jul 2014 15:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160435 Clause 25 did not amount to an arbitration agreement because Section 2(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 requires a written agreement to submit present or future disputes to arbitration, and this clause only gave the Public Health Engineer final decision-making power on specifications, workmanship, materials, and related matters. Read as a whole, the clause created an administrative role rather than a reference to an arbitrator, so finality of the Engineer's decision could not by itself imply arbitration. The limitation question on the facts could not cure the absence of an arbitration agreement. No dispute or difference under the contract was therefore referable to arbitration. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 15 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160435