AMBARALI BARLASKAR Vs. ATAUR RAHMAN BARLASKAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals raise common questions and are disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) BRIEFLY the facts giving rise to these appeals are that the decree -holders Respondents brought a suit for recovery of some amounts against the Appellant judgment -debtor as maintenance and for accounts on the ground that under a certain wakf the Plaintiffs were entitled as beneficiaries to certain amount of money and share in the wakf property. The Appellant judgment -debtor was asked to render accounts. The defence taken by the Mutawalli apart from other defenses was that the Plaintiffs have overdrawn a large sum of money. There were two suits filed by different sets of beneficiaries. The suits were decreed by the trial court and two appeals numbered as First Appeals Nos. 8 of 1956 and 9 of 1956 were filed by the judgment -debtor before this Court. The parties compromised the matter in first appeal on the 16th December 1958 and the appeals were accordingly disposed of in accordance with that compromise. The relevant portions of the compromise are as follows:

(3.) IT is further contended that as the arbitrators are supposed to know the provisions of Rule 3 of Schedule l attached to the Arbitration Act and not of the terms of the compromise, the proper way of interpreting Clause (f) of the compromise should be that the period of one month should start from the date of the submission of the award and not from the date, of the notice. We see no substance in this contention. It will be doing violence to the plain language of Clause (f) of the compromise which expressly provides that the right to apply for execution arises if the arbitrators fail to give their award within one month of the reference. If the parties to the compromise intended that the period of one month was to run after the period of four months there should have been an express provision in the compromise to that effect. On the interpretation of the plain language of the compromise, in our opinion, the only meaning which can be put is that in case the arbitrators fall to submit their award within one month, the right to apply for execution of the decree of the trial court arose in favour of the beneficiaries after the expiry of the said period.