STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. TIPPER CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment dated the 12th of September, 1969, of a single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad accepting an application under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, setting aside the orders of the courts below and directing that the application made by the defendant under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act shall stand rejected so that the suit would proceed.

(2.) The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was filed by the respondent before us for recovery of Rs. 2,000 on account of dues recoverable from the Irrigation Department of the petitioner State for work done by the plaintiff in pursuance of an agreement, clause 22 of which runs thus:

(3.) Mr. Dixit relied on Governor-General v. Simla Banking and Industrial Co. Ltd., AIR 1947 Lah 215, Dewan Chand v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1961 J and K 58 and Ram Lal v. Punjab State, AIR 1966 Punj 436 (FB). In the first of these authorities the clause appearing in the contract of the parties which was held by Abdur Rahman, J., to amount to an arbitration agreement was practically word for word, the same with which we are concerned here but we are of the opinion that the interpretation put thereupon was not correct. As pointed out by the High Court such a clause can be interpreted only as one conferring power on the Superintending Engineer to take decisions all by himself and not by reason of any reference which the parties might make to him.