Absence of word “Arbitration” in the Contract and Existence of Arbitration Agreement
Judgment dated 7.9.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Commercial Arbitration Application (L) No.15854 f 2026 of R.A. Ghule through its sole proprietor Rajabhau Apparao Ghule Vs. Sinnar Municipal Council and others
ed with a
party. In Chief Conservator of Forests, Rewa v. Ratan Singh Hans,
AIR 1967 SC 166, the contract provided that any dispute as to the
performance or breach of the contract “shall be referred to the
Chief Conservator of Forests whose decision shall be final and
binding on the parties”. The Chief Conservator was a senior officer
of the Government, which was a party to the contract. The
Supreme Court held that the expression “shall be referred to”
meant that the dispute was to be referred to that officer “as an
arbitrator to decide the dispute”, and that the clause conferred
authority upon him “to adjudicate upon disputes”. To the same
effect is Rukmanibai Gupta (supra), where the dispute was to be
“decided by the lessor whose decision shall be final”, the lessor
being the State and a party to the lease, and the clause was held to
spell out an arbitration agreement. Clause 8 stands on the same
5
Uploaded on – 07/09/2026
Downloaded on – 07/10/2026 17:16:05
carapl15854-2026-J.doc
footing: the dispute is to be “referred to” the said authority, whose
decision is to be “final and binding on both the parties”.
