LAWS(PVC)-1935-8-124

GANGA SINGH Vs. KRJITWAR SINGH

Decided On August 29, 1935
GANGA SINGH Appellant
V/S
KRJITWAR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of this case, at least those which can engage the attention of this Court, are similar to the facts in Civil Revision No. 627 of 1934, and my decision in this case will govern my decision in the other revision as well.

(2.) It appears that Kunwar Jitwar Singh brought a suit for preemption against Ganga Singh; Sughar Singh, Deo Singh and Mt. Pariharin. The last defendant was the vendor and as such a proforma defendant. At one stage the plaintiff and Ganga Singh and Deo Singh referred their dispute to arbitration. Sughar Singh, defendant, 2, was a Sub-Inspector at a different place and proceedings against him were ex-parte and he neither filed a written statement nor engaged any counsel nor was he a signatory to the deed of reference. The Court however referred the matter to arbitration and the arbitral or decided that the plaintiff's suit ought to be dismissed.

(3.) On this it war Singh the plaintiff filed objections before the Court below and prayed that the award be set aside because the reference to arbitration was not by all the parties interested and because the arbitrator was guilty of misconduct. The Court below has held that the arbitrator took great pains in the matter and acted with perfect impartiality. It has however held that the order of reference was bad inasmuch as Sughar Singh was a person interested and be did not join in the agreement to refer. I agree with the Court below that Sughar Singh was a person interested and the reference to agree was in that sense perhaps bad, although it is contended before me that. Ganga Singh was the head of the family and his agreement should be deemed to be an agreement on behalf of the other two defendants who were his younger brothers. The fact however remains that Ganga Singh at first tried to defend the suit on behalf of his brothers, but ultimately the written statement was by him alone. It is not possible upon the materials on the record to hold that the agreement by Ganga Singh should be deemed to be an agreement by Sughar Singh as well who did not sign the agreement.