BISHAN SINGH Vs. ANJMAN IMDAD KAFAYAT AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS execution second a appeal has arisen in the following circumstances: -

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that as no notice under rule 58 was served, there could be no question of any valid appointment of an arbitrator under section 50 and, therefore, the determination of the alleged dispute under section 50 would be wholly without jurisdiction and thus a nullity The learned counsel relies on the decisions in Sayei Mahbub Hussain Shah and others v. Anjuman Imdad Qarza : A.I.R. 1942 Lah. 129 : 44 P.L.R. 59, and Abdul Ghani v. Anjuman -i -Imdad Qarza Bahami Chak No. 127, A.I.R. l942 Lah. 217 :, 41 P.L.R. 373. Mr. Justice Tek Chand, with whom Beckett J. agreed in Abdul Ghant's case, A.I.R. l942 Lah. 217 :, 41 P.L.R. 373, observed as follows: -

(3.) I may also bring to the notice of the Courts below the salutary rule laid down by Din Mohammad J. in Sayed Mahbub's case : A.I.R. 1942 Lah. 129 : 44 P.L.R. 59. The learned Judge, at page 132 of the judgment, observed as follows: