In Brief

A contractor challenged rescission of his construction contract before the High Court. The High Court directed arbitration by the Housing Commissioner as a consent order. The arbitrator rejected the contractor's claims. The contractor later filed a fresh reference petition before the Madhya Pradesh Arbitration Tribunal for the same claims. The Tribunal dismissed it as not maintainable; the High Court reversed this. The Supreme Court held that since the arbitrator's award was not challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and had attained finality, the doctrine of issue estoppel barred the subsequent reference petition for identical claims. The Court restored the Tribunal's order.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.