CHANDAK AND COMPANY, NAGPUR Vs. DEOKARAN KANAIYALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is against an order passed in Civil Appeal No, 229 of 1971 allowing that appeal and setting aside an order passed by the Third Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Akola in Regular Civil Suit No 330 of 1968, making a decree on the basis of the award which was filed before that Court.

(2.) THE petitioners before me, M/s Chandak and Company of Katol, had certain forward delivery contracts with M/s. Deokaran Kanaiyalal, Akola in cotton seed According to the petitioners, there were two transactions which they entered into with M/s Deokaran Kanaiyalal, original defendants and respondents before me, hereinafter referred to as Deokaran Kanaiyalal, which resulted, after the contracts being squared up, in a profit to them of Rs. 3418. The petitioners demanded that amount from Deokaran Kanaiyalal and as Deokaran Kanaiyalal did not pay the amount, a notice was issued. Thereafter as Deokaran Kanaiyalal was a member of the M. P. Commercial Exchange, the plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as Chandak and Co., referred the matter to an Arbitrator by making an application to the Exchange appointing its own Arbitrator. M/s Deokaran Kanaiyalal declined to appoint an Arbitrator and declined to accept the jurisdiction of the Arbitrators denying that there was any subsisting arbitration agreement between them and Chandak and Co. According to them, Chandak and Co. also had one more contract with them and that these contracts were not "subject to arbitration bye -laws of the Exchange." They, therefore, objected to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrators. Nonetheless the Arbitrators entered upon the reference. Deokaran Kanaiyalal appeared before the Arbitrators, under protest objecting to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrators. But the Arbitrators in due course made an award in favour of Chandank and Co. awarding a sum of Rs. 3418 to them. The award was then filed in Court for being made into a decree and that is how these proceedings started which have come up before this Court now by way of revision application.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge framed issues on these pleadings of the parties and held that the award was not without jurisdiction, nor was it otherwise invalid or improperly procured. In the view which he took, therefore, he decreed the claim and made the award into a decree of the Court. It was against this judgment and order that Deokaran Kanaiyalal appealed to the District Judge in Regular Civil Appeal No. 229 of 1971.