GADULA RAMI NAIDU Vs. MEESALA SEETHAN NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent in this petition filed a suit (O.S. No. 301 of 1929) to recover Rs. 900 from the defendant. While the suit was being tried, the parties entered into an agreement Ex. A without reference to the Court to submit the matter to arbitration and "the other disputes between us." Ex. A ends as follows: We having agreed to this willingly, the first executant has withdrawn the suit O.S. No. 301 of 1929 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Eajam.

(2.) One of the five arbitrators appointed could not act and therefore it was necessary to make a second reference, Ex. B. This begins: We were having disputes and fighting with each other in Courts and to settle all disputes between us we executed in favour of you four persons and another, Rowthu Swami Naidu, a reference to arbitration on 21 April 1930. It ends: It is agreed that the award passed by you shall be binding on us as per terms of the previous agreement dated 21 April 1930.

(3.) This is dated 16 May 1930. Thereupon the arbitrators met and each party put in a list of debts which he claimed from the other. It may be stated that each of them claimed to have paid debts to which the other had to contribute and the suit, 301 of 1929, was laid for contribution. The arbitrators made an award and the respondent to this petition filed O.S. No. 650 of 1930 to file the award under para. 20 of Schedule 2, Civil P. C, as the defendant had. refused to abide by the award. The defence was that the words "the other disputes in Ex. A, were unauthorised and that the only matter referred to arbitration was O.S. No. 301. As regards Ex. B the defendant pleaded that it was not a genuine document at all nor was Ex. C (1), the list of claims put in by him as against the plaintiff. The trial Court found that both Exs. A and B were genuine throughout as also Ex. C-1. The District Munsif says: I have therefore no hesitation in holding that the defendant submitted to the arbitration of the five arbitrators. But the defendant deposes as D. W. 1 that ho told them to stop all further proceedings since he was not willing to abide by their award.