UDOYCHAND PANALAL Vs. PEGUZDAR AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question raised by this petition is as to the meaning of Section 110 of the Civil Procedure Code. The circumstances which have given rise to it are peculiar and complicated. They arise out of a contract for sale of goods made by the respondents with the petitioner. In the contract of sale there was a provision that all disputes arising out of the sale should be settled by arbitration. A dispute did arise and cross-claims were made. The parties commenced arbitration proceedings, but disagreed as to appointment of arbitrators. An arbitrator appointed by the respondents made an ex parte award in their favour, but this was set aside by the Court. New arbitrators chosen in a manner ordered by the Court were then appointed. Another ex parte award was made and this also was set aside. Against this order setting it aside the respondents appealed. The petitioner then filed a suit claiming the damages he had sought in the arbitration. This was met by an application to stay the suit pending the disposal of the above- mentioned appeal, or otherwise until the matter was settled by arbitration The High Court granted the stay. The petitioner appealed against that order. The Court of Appeal then took up this appeal and the appeal before mentioned and it dismissed both appeals, the date of the dismissal of the last-mentioned being July 28, 1922. The parties then again betook themselves to arbitration. Again the arbitrators were unable to agree and ex parte awards were made, one in favour of the petitioner for Rs. 81,000 odd, the other in favour of the respondents for Rs. 3,900 odd.

(2.) On December 5, the High Court, on the application of the respondents, set aside the award in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner then raised a suit to set aside the award in favour of the respondents, and it is in this suit that the petition comes before the Board. The High Court in its original jurisdiction set it aside, but on appeal the Appeal Court reversed and dismissed the suit The petitioner applied for leave to appeal, but this was refused upon the ground that the sum involved was neither directly nor indirectly of the value of Rs. 10,000.

(3.) The only question, therefore, is whether the case falls within the words of Section 110; that section is as follows:- 110. In each of the cases mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of section 109, the amount or value of the subject-matter of the suit in the Court of first instance must be ten thousand rupees or upwards, and the amount or value of the subject matter in dispute on appeal to His Majesty in Council must be the same sum or upwards, or the decree or final order must involve, directly or indirectly, some claim or question to or respecting property of like amount of value. and where the decree or final order appealed from affirms the decision of the Court immediately below the Court passing such decree or final order, the appeal must evolve some substantial question of law.