SIIRI LAKSHMI NARAIN Vs. HRI BALGOVIND AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the order of the Civil Judge, Mirzapur, rejecting an application of the Appellant for the stay of proceedings in the suit in view of Section 34, Arbitration Act.

(2.) The copy of the order filed along with the memorandum of appeal is not a correct copy of the order appealed against. The learned Counsel for the Appellant wanted time to file the correct copy. The record of the case is in Court and we have looked up the correct order. In view of the opinion we have formed about the appeal we do not think it necessary to grant time for filing a correct copy of the order appealed against.

(3.) The Appellant's application was rejected because he had applied twice before for time to file the written statement. Those applications were made in April and May, 1955. The application Under Section 34, Arbitration Act was made on 7-7-1955. The case U.P. Government v. Sri Har Nath, 1949 AIR(All) 611 lays down that an application for grant of time for filing a written statement would amount to the taking of steps in the proceedings within the meaning of that expression in Section 34, Arbitration Act. The view of the learned Civil Judge is, therefore, perfectly correct.