PROTAP CHUNDER DEY Vs. TOOLSEY DASS DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an, application to file an award made under the Arbitration Act of 1899. An objection has been taken to the award, and I have, been asked to remit it to the arbitrators. It is argued, however, that I have no power to do this on account of Section 520 of the Civil Procedure Code under which an award may not be remitted except on certain grounds which do not exist in this case. I do not think, however, that Section 520 applies to arbitrations under the Arbitration Act. Reading the Code and the Act together, it appears to me plain that Section 506 to 522 of the Code apply to arbitrations in a suit and Section 523 to 526, now superseded by the Arbitration Act, to arbitrations initiated by the parties.

(2.) I therefore consider that I have a discretion to remit this award for the reconsideration of the arbitrators under Section 13 of the Arbitration Act.

(3.) The ground on which the application to file is resisted and on which I am asked to remit this award is, that the award orders that the plaintiff shall pay a sum of money to the defendant on the latter delivering up certain title-deeds, of which he denies having possession. Does this amount to a finding that the defendant is in possession of the title-deeds? In my opinion, looking to the facts of the case, it does not. The affidavits show that though the question of possession was mentioned, it was never judicially enquired into, and that the arbitrators never really had their minds directed to the point, while the arbitration was proceeding, and the arbitrators themselves entertain different views, as to whether or not they decided the point. The award must therefore, be remitted to them to make a fresh award.