LOTAWAN Vs. LACHYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit to recover possession of a house. The claim was only valued at the small sum of Rs. 43-4-0. Amongst the array of parties were minors on both aides who were represented in the suit by their respective guardians. During the course of the litigation an application was made in writing by all the parties that the matters in dispute should be referred to the arbitration of a named arbitrator. In pursuance of this application the court made an order of reference. The arbitrator took upon himself the burden of the arbitration and made an award. Objections were filed, on behalf of the defendants, to the award. The objections were six in number, relating to the conduct of the arbitrator and his alleged refusal to hear the evidence offered by the parties and other matters. No objection was taken that the leave of the court was not obtained prior to the order of reference, and it is quite clear that no such matter was ever brought under the notice of the court which had made the order of reference. The learned Munsif heard the various objections and having overruled them made a decree in accordance with the award. An appeal was preferred to the District Judge by the defendants, and there for the first time it was objected that the leave of the court had not been obtained prior to the reference, and it was contended on these grounds that there was no valid reference and, therefore, no valid award, and that an appeal lay. The learned District Judge accepted this contention and set aside the decree and the award and remanded the case. Hence the present appeal.

(2.) Arbitration proceedings are now governed by the second schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure. The first paragraph provides as follows:

(3.) Where in any suit all the parties interested agree that any matter in difference between them shall be referred to arbitration, they may, at any time before judgment is pronounced, apply to the court for an order of reference.