BIHARI LAL Vs. HEM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 is directed against the order passed by the learned District Judge, Hamirpur in Arbitration Case No. 1 of 1998, decided on 8.11.2005 whereby he has dismissed the objections filed by appellant to the award dated 23.5.1994 passed by the Arbitrator. Shri Anand Sarup, Advocate, and has made the award the rule of the court. It would be pertinent to mention that the case is governed by the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

(2.) THE facts necessary for disposal of the case are that appellant, Bihari Lal and respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 Hem Raj, Surinder Nath and Sulekh Chand are the sons and respondent No. 3 Parsino Devi is the widow of late Bakshi Ram, son of Nikka Ram. Bakshi Ram expired on 21.8.1978. He left behind huge moveable and immoveable properties. His property situate at Shiv Nagar, Ward No. 4, Hamirpur was mutated in the name of all the parties in equal shares in accordance with the will of Bakshi Ram, dated 10.8.1978. Other properties of the deceased were situated at Gandhi Nagar within the Municipal Limits of Hamirpur and also at Nagrota Gazian. The deceased was also possessed of agricultural land in a number of villages.

(3.) DURING the pendency of the proceedings before the appellate court all the parties entered into an arbitration agreement whereby they agreed to appoint Shri Anand Sarup, Advocate, Hamirpur as the sole arbitrator to decide what was the joint property (moveable and immoveable property) of the parties at the time of the death of their predecessor, Bakshi Ram and to partition this entire moveable and immoveable property by metes and bounds between the parties in equal shares. It would be pertinent to mention that in the partition agreement it was also mentioned that it was for the arbitrator to decide whether to receive or not to receive any evidence in support of the claim of the parties.