PARAMJIT SINGH Vs. SATYAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of the objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by the petitioners for setting aside the award dated 2nd May,2001 passed by Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, the Arbitrator appointed by the Court with the agreement of the parties in Suit No.1575/90 titled "Ram Singh Vs. Smt.Devki Devi & ors.". :

(2.) Before dealing with the objections to the award, it would be appropriate to give a short background of the facts. Three brothers S/Shri Ram Singh, Swaran Singh and Amar Singh being the sons of late Shri Bawa Singh purchased a plot measuring 311 sq.yards being K-18, Green Park, New Delhi in the year 1959 on which they jointly built a two and half storeyed building. Shri Amar Singh died in the year 1963. His estate was inherited by respondents 2 to 6. Shri Swaran Singh died in the year 1975 and his estate was inherited by his wife Smt.Saraswati Devi now deceased and petitioners 1 to 3 and late Shri Pyara Singh (son) now represented by his LRs being respondents 7 to 10 and respondent No.11 (daughter). The third brother Shri Ram Singh died in the year 1998 and his estate devolved upon respondent No.l Smt.Satyawati. Shri Ram Singh had filed a civil suit being Suit No.1575/90 titled "Shri Ram Singh Vs. Smt.Devki Devi & ors." in the High Court for partition of property No.K-18, Green Park, New Delhi by metes and bounds. At the request of the parties, vide order dated 8th December,1998, the disputes being the subject matter of the suit were referred to the arbitration of Justice Lokeshwar Prasad (retired Judge of this Court). The learned Arbitrator entered upon the reference and adjudicated upon the disputes between the parties. Shri Ram Singh had expired during the pendency of the suit proceedings itself and his legal heir Smt.Satyawati was impleaded. Smt.Satyawati filed her claim and the other respondents filed their written statements. Vide order dated 24th November,1999, it was decided by the Arbitrator that the property to be partitioned was not ancestral property. It was also decided that the property had not been partitioned by metes and bounds. As such, the Arbitrator vide orders dated 6th December,1999 with the consent of the parties, appointed M/s Modern India Architects as the Local Commissioner to separate the share of the claimant i.e. Smt.Satyawati, respondent No.l. The entire property undisputedly belonged to three groups representing three brothers i.e. Ram Singh, Swaran Si.ngh and Amar Singh. There is no dispute that each group has l/3rd undivided share in the property. Smt.Satyawati being the widow of Ram Singh represented one group (hereinafter called as 1st Group), whereas petitioners Paramjit Singh, Ranbir Singh and Kamaljit Singh and respondents 7 to 11, being heirs of Swaran Singh formed the second group, collectively having l/3rd share and respondents 2 to 6 being the heirs of Shri Amar Singh formed the third group.

(3.) The Local Commissioner/Architects submitted their first report dated 1st January,2000 by which they separated the share of claimant i.e. of 1st Group in the property. The parties filed objections to the report, inter alia, raising an objection that the Architects had not considered the basements in the house. In view of the objections, another Local Commissioner was appointed to consider if there existed three basements in the said property. The Local Commissioner Mr.Rajesh Gupta, Advocate gave a report stating that there was no basement in the property. As no objections were filed to that report, it became final. During the pendency of the proceedings, Shri Jasbir Singh, respondent No.4 representing the 3rd Group moved an application praying that the share of their group i.e. respondents 2 to 6 be also separated and the same Architects be appointed for the purpose which was allowed by the Arbitrators vide orders dated 20th November,2000. Accordingly, the Architects submitted their second report dated 16th December,2000 separating the share of respondents 2 to 6 in one block and that of petitioners and respondents 7 to 11 in another block. The petitioners group accepted the recommendations of the Architect and by moving an application dated 20th April,2001 prayed that the property be partitioned as suggested by the Architect. Statement of Paramjit Singh, petitioner No.l, who appeared for himself and his brothers i.e. the 2nd Group, was also recorded to that effect. Even Shri Jasbir Singh (respondent No.4) for himself and his group (3rd Group) also gave no objection for the property being partitioned as suggested by the Architects. Jasbir Singh, however, moved an application on 21st April,2001 stating -that the partition be not effected as suggested by the two reports of the Architect but be effected as per the actual existing possession of the property by metes and bounds. This application was disposed of by the Arbitrator after hearing the parties.