K VENKULU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CMP No.19168 of 2002 in Rev. CMP No. 73795 of 2001 in CMA No. 1338 of 1991 is filed with a prayer to condone the delay of 2892 days in filing the review petition. Rev. CMP No. 22550 of 2002 is filed with a prayer to review the judgment in CMA No. 1338 of 1991 dated 30-9-1994.

(2.) The review petitioner entered into a contract with the respondents herein on 28-5-1987 for execution of certain works the further details of which may not be necessary for the present purpose. It appears that the value of the contract was Rs. 6.92,496.00 and the same is required to be completed within a period of one and half months. It appears that there were some disputes between the parties. Eventually the petitioner 86 A. P. filed O.S. No. 759 of 1988 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge (as he then was called), Miryalaguda. For recovery of certain amounts on the basis of the above mentioned contract. One fact that is required to be taken note of at this stage, in that the petitioner himself styled his suit as 'arbitration suit' and paid a fixed Court-fee of Rs. 250/-. The respondents defended the suit by filing a written statement. Issues were framed and a regular trial was held and as many as 3 witnesses for the petitioner and one witness for the respondents were examined and as many as 30 documents were marked on either side. The suit was decreed for an amount of Rs. 4,61,470-78 ps.

(3.) Challenging the decree, the respondents herein filed an appeal in CMA No. 1338 of 1991 on the peculiar ground that the learned Subordinate Judge, Miryalaguda, treated the proceedings before him as if it was a regular civil suit, but in fact, he was required to act as an arbitrator in view of certain clause in the contract. The relevant portion of which reads as follows :