DAMODARAN Vs. BHASKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition came before us on a reference made by Thomas J. To appreciate the legal questions raised in the C. R. P. it is necessary to briefly state the facts.

(2.) O. P. (Arbitration) No. 7/79 on the file of the subordinate Judge's Court, Thodupuzha was filed by the 1st respondent herein seeking to pass a decree in accordance with an arbitration award dated 5-5-1979. The case of the 1st respondent was that he and the petitioner herein entered into a partnership agreement for starting a rice mill, that the said business ceased to function from November, 1976 onwards, that thereafter he had applied to the local S. N. D. P. office bearers to arbitrate the dispute between him and the petitioner and accordingly the S. N. D. P. Office-bearers arbitrated the matter and passed an award dated 5-5-1979.

(3.) A preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent that since an appeal is provided under S. 39 of the Arbitration Act, no revisional jurisdiction can be exercised in view of the bar contained in S. 115 (2) of the C. P. C. According to the learned counsel, an appeal would lie under S. 39 (1) of the Arbitration Act against the order under challenge since against the order refusing to set aside the award an appeal is maintainable under S. 39 (1) of the Arbitration Act.