SAKHARAM MARUTI Vs. RAJMAL GIRDHARLAL MARWADI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question of law in this second appeal relates to the validity of the award upon which the suit is based. The facts are these. The defendants represent the original owners of the property. The original owners effected a mortgage in favour of one Birdichand on November 3, 1890. He assigned his rights to the present plaintiff on July 27, 1910. The plaintiff applied on July 30, 1910, to the conciliator under the Dekkhan Agriculturists Relief Act for a certificate. On November 28, 1910, apparently the parties agreed before the conciliator that the matter should be settled through arbitration; and they appointed the conciliator as their arbitrator, who made an award on the same day. On the same date the plaintiff made an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Parner for filing the award, and for a decree in terms of the award. The written statement of the defendants was filed on the same date, whereby they agreed that the plaintiff's application should be allowed, but the Subordinate Judge was not satisfied with that statement, and on notices being issued to the defendants, a fresh written statement was filed by them on December 21, 1910, in which they repudiated the award. The Court rejected the plaintiff's application and refused to file the award, on April 10, 1911, on the ground that the claim on the original cause of action would be time-barred at the date of the award, It appears that the plaintiff again applied, on January 28, 1913, for the restoration of the suit in view of Bombay Act XIII of 1912; but that application was rejected. Ultimately he filed the present suit on November 25, 1916, claiming to enforce his rights under the award of November 28, 1910.

(2.) The trial Court dismissed the suit in December 1917. In the appeal by the plaintiff to the District Court, it was held that the suit was barred by res judicata. The plaintiff appealed to this Court, and in Second Appeal No. 427 of 1919, it was held by this Court that the plaintiff was entitled to a decision on the merits, and that his claim was not barred by the plea of res judicata. See Rajmal Girdharlal v. Maruti Shivram (1920) I.L.R. 45 Bom. 329 : 22 Bom. L.R. 1377

(3.) After the remand by this Court, the appeal was decided by the learned District Judge on the merits. He held that the award in question was a legal and valid award, and accordingly decreed the plaintiff's claim in terms of the award on August 8, 1921.