RAKSHAWATI BURMAN Vs. JASUMATI W/O AKHAI BHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 6 -5 -1996 in M.C.A. No. 8/94 whereby the order dated 27 -4 -1994 of IInd Civil Judge, Class -II, Mahasamund in Civil Suit No. 86 -A/94 allowing the application of defendant/respondent for appointment of arbitrator under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter mentioned as the 'Act' for short).

(2.) THE facts leading to the present revision in brief are that, on 18 -10 - 1993 the plaintiff/petitioner filed a Civil Suit No. 86 -A/94 in the Court of IInd Civil Judge Class -II, Mahasamund for obtaining possession of Saw Mill leased out by him to defendant/respondent. The plaint of the said suit is document No. 1. The defendant/respondent in the said Civil Suit filed an application (document No. 2) under section 34 of the Act, alleging therein that the parties had agreed to refer their dispute to the arbitrators and the arbitrators have also given their award on 3 -8 -1992. The application was opposed by the petitioner. However, the said application under section 34 of the Act was allowed by the trial Court by its order dated 27 -4 -1994. An appeal under section 39 of the Act was preferred by the petitioner/plaintiff, which however was dismissed by the impugned order and the order of the trial Court dated 27 -4 -1994 was affirmed.

(3.) IN view of the contentions as above it has to be considered whether in the facts and circumstances of the case an application under section 34 of the Act was maintainable and as to whether the Courts below were justified in allowing the prayer made therein. It would be useful to reproduce section 34 of the Act, which reads: