V ANJANEYA SETTY Vs. M G BROTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a common judgment and decree passed in O. S. No. 17 of 1972 and O. P. No. 66 of 1972 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Adoni, decreeing the suit with costs and dismissing the O. P. with costs. So they could be disposed of by a common judgment

(2.) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 17 of 1972 is the respondent in O. P. No. 66 of 1972; and the defendant in O. S. No. 17 of 1972 and M/s. Vitta Dodda Hanumanthappa Subbaiah Setty and Co., represented by the then partner Vitta Anjinaiah are the petitioners in O. P. No. 66 of 1972.

(3.) THE averments of the defendant in the written statement briefly are: THE suit is not maintainable as the defendant denies that the plaintiff-partnership firm is registered and that M.R. Ganganna is a partner therein. THE arbitration agreement was between M/s. M. G. Brothers Oil Mills on one part and M/s. Vitta Dodda Hanumanthappa Anjaniah Setty on the second part. THE plaintiff was not a party to the arbitration agreement and so the suit must be dismissed in limine. THE suit is not filed by M/s. M. G. Brothers Oil Mills and also it is not filed against M/s. Vitta Dodda Hanumanthappa Subbaiah Setty and Co. who are actually the parties to the agreement as well as the award. So, the suit is liable to be dismissed in limine. THE allegations that M/s. Vitta Dodda Hanumanthappa Subbaiah Setty and Co., became indebted in the course of its dealings with the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 10,377-63 p. to the plaintiff, that the defendant came out of the said firm and started business, that the amount due to the plaintiff from the said firm was taken over by the defendant, and that the defendant has undertaken to discharge the said liability, are all false and denied. THE allegations regarding the other claims made by the plaintiff cannot be alleged in this suit under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Further, the allegations that the defendant, on his own account, became indebted to the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 8,167.06 p. in respect of purchase of groundnut oil, that the defendant also became indebted to the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. 15,251-71 p., that the plaintiff incurred so much loss on account of despatch of one wagon load of groundnut oil, that there were demands for payment of amount with interest, that in respect of the above mentioned transaction, disputes arose between the plaintiff and the defendant, that there were any attempts to resolve their differences are alt false and denied. It is not true and correct to say that the arbitrators considered all the points of the parties, scrutinized the accounts and statement of accounts. It is incorrect to say that both the parties filed any accounts and statements. THE defendant does not also admit as to when the arbitrators made the award and as to when they signed it. THE award is a document which must speak for itself. No other document can be looked into now to explain or to add to the award. THE further allegation that as per the award, the defendant has to pay a sum of Rs. 27.920-91 p. as per the details mentioned in the plaint is false and denied THE award does not mention anything about M/s. M. G. Brothers and the various amounts due if any according to them. THE details given in the plaint are also false and denied. In the plaint, only two amounts are shown as the claims granted by the award and they are : (a) InterestRs. 3,105/- (b) Loss of account of wagon sale.Rs. 8,167-06 p. In fact, the award says that Rs. 3,105.00 need not be paid towards interest. THE award does not say that Rs. 29,645-91 p. was the amount due, that Rs. 1,725.00 was the sale proceeds of 60 old empty drums at Rs. 28-75 p. each as per the bill dated 3-11-1971 of M/s. Hindustan Levers and it should be deducted, and that Rs. 27,920-91 p. is the amount due and payable to M/s. M. G. Brothers by the defendant. THE defendant is not liable to pay Rs. 29,192-91 p. or any part of it to the plaintiff. THE award does not order the defendant to pay any amount to M/s. M. G. Brothers. Further, M/s. Vitta Dodda Hanumanthappa Subbaiah Setty and Co. and this defendant as petitioners filed O. P. No. 66 of 1972 against M/s. M. G. Brothers Oil Mills as respondent as they are the only parties to the arbitration proceedings, for setting aside the award and for revoking the arbitration agreement in question. THE defendant craves leave to read the said petition as part of the written statement.