SETH RAMRICHHPAL SIRYA Vs. AJMER TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Seth Ramrichhpal Sirya, on behalf of himself and as manager and karta of the joint Hindu family known as Tilokchand Dilsukhrai, resident of AJmer, has filed this appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order of the Senior Civil Judge, Ajmer, dated 16-2-1960, overruling the appellant's objections to the validity of the award and making award a rule of the Court and directing a decree In terms oj the award.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the appeal are briefly these the respondent M/s. Ajmer Traders, a registered partnership firm, Naya bazar, Ajmer, through its partner Birdhichand of Ajmer put in an application in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Ajmer, on 18th March, 1958, against Seth Ramrichpal Sirya of Ajmer, praying for a judgment and decree on the basis of an award. The respondent-applicant's case was that the respondent and the appellant having had some dispute in regard to certain shon situated outside Railway Goods-shed, Ajmer, known as "sirya Market Ajmer" referred their dispute for arbitration to shrl Krishna Gopal Garg under an agreement dated 25-7-1956. The arbitrator Shri Krishna Gopal Garg gave his award on 25-10-1956. The respondent produced the award with the application and, as stated earlier, prayed for a judgment and decree on its basis. It appears that without notice to the appellant the court began ex parte proceedings. On 19-11-1958, the appellant appeared before the court and applied for setting aside the ex parte proceedings. The court by its order dated 17-111959 set aside the ex parte proceedings and the appellant was granted time to file his objections on or before 21st December, 1959. The appellant actually filed his objections on 18-12-1959 urging various grounds against the validity of the award and prayed for either setting aside of the award or for remitting it for reconsideration. Apart from these objections the appellant also raised a legal objection that the award having not been filed by the arbitrator or by anybody else acting under the authority of the arbitrator, there was no proper filing ot the award in court and, therefore, the court could not entertain an application for making the award a rule of the court and passing a decree in terms of the award. The respondent in its turn pleaded that the appellant having failed to file a proper application for setting aside the award within the period of 30 days from 19-111958,. these objections were barred by limitation. The trial Judge formulated the following three points for its determination--

(3.) NEXT comes section 17, which provides for the pronouncement of a judgment in accordance with the award to be followed by a decree. An analysis of Section 17 will show that the following conditions must be complied before a Court can pronounce a judgment on the basis ot an award -