RAVINDRA MOTILAL SHAH Vs. CHINUBHAI CHIMANLAL DALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court Ahmedabad Mr. H. B. Shah dated 7th April 1970 in Review Applications Nos. 71 of 1970 and 72 of 1970 below Ex. I. He has allowed the review applications and set aside the order made by him on 16-1-1970. He has allowed Application No. 275 of 1968 and directed that a decree be passed in terms of the award of the arbitrators and dismissed Application No. 354 of 19690 He has also further passed an order that there will be no order as to costs either in review applications or in Application: No. 273 of 1968 or 354 of 1969.

(2.) THE facts leading rise to this appeal briefly stated are as under: THE aforesaid review applications had been made for reviewing the orders made in Application No. 273 of 1968 and Application No. 354 of 1969 on 16-1-1970. Application No. 273 of 1968 was filed in the City Civil Court Ahmedabad by the arbitrators for passing a decree in terms of an award under sec. 14 of the Indian Arbitration Act 1940 (which will be hereinafter referred to as the Ac) Application No. 354 of 1969 was filed by present appellant Ravindra Motilal Shah for setting aside the award made by the arbitrators. Both those applications were heard together and disposed of by a common order on 16-1-1970.

(3.) AS said earlier the present appellant filed his objections on rec- eipt of notice from the Court by a separate application referred to above. The validity of the award was challenged on two grounds. The first ground was that the last transaction entered into between the parties was dated 13 and the reference was made by the plaintiff on 7-10-1967 and therefore it was patently beyond a period of three years and was clearly barred by law of limitation. That contention was negatived by the Court The second contention was that the arbitrators had entered upon the reference on 15th December 1967 and they were bound to make their award within a period of four months under rule 3 of the First Schedule of the Act and since they have made the award on 20-4-1968 it was beyond a period of four months from their entering upon a reference and therefore an award was made without jurisdiction and therefore it was and void. That contention of his found favour with the learned trial Judge and on that ground the award of the arbitrators was held to be a nullity and was declared to be null and void and the order dated 16 came to be passed as said earlier.