NIDAMARTHI KRISHNAMOORTHY Vs. GARIGIPARTI GANAPATILINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application for adjournment, in which the Court was asked to send the records to the arbitrator to whom the parties had already referred the matter in dispute in the pending suit, seems to have been treated by all parties as an application to the Court itself to also make a reference to the said arbitrator under Schedule II, paragraph 1, of Section 1. The Court acted upon that application on that footing, and we think the appellant is estopped from contending that the application was not of such a character.

(2.) Further, we think we are bound by the interpretation put upon the Privy Council decision in Ghulam Khan v. Muhammad Hassan 29 C. 167 : 29 I.A. 51 : 6 C.W.N. 226 by the Full Bench of this Court in Tallapragada Suryanaraina Row v. Tallapragada Sarabaya 9 Ind. Cas. 173 : 21 M.L.J. 263 : 9 M.L.T. 251 : (1911) 1 M.W.N. 151

(3.) The Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 325 and 326 of 1914 are dismissed with costs.