BADRI CHAUDHURI Vs. MTGHAMOA GHAUDHRAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit which related to an award made by certain arbitrators without the intervention of Court. The case which the plaintiff sought to make out at first was that the award was liable to be set aside in its entirety, but some time after the institution of the suit she made an application for the amendment of the plaint in which she asked the Court to set aside the award not in its entirety but only in part. The defendant Badri Chaudhuri, who is the appellant in this Court, contended in his written statement that the award was valid and binding on the parties. The learned Subordinate Judge having in the decree which he passed in the suit upheld certain portions of the award and declared the other portions as inoperative, defendant Badri Chaudhuri now appeals against the decision of the Subordinate Judge and contends that the award should be either upheld or set aside in its entirety. The plaintiff is admittedly the widow of one Murat Chaudhuri and the defendant Badri Chaudhuri is his nephew. After the death of Murat Chaudhuri a dispute arose between the plaintiff and Badri as to who should succeed to his estate, and both parties ultimately agreed to refer their dispute to certain persons who were appointed by them as arbitrators by a deed of reference, dated 12 December 1930. The arbitrators were under this deed empowered to give their award upon taking oral and documentary evidence regarding the immoveable and moveable properties appertaining to the estate of Babu Murat Chaudhuri aforesaid.

(2.) The arbitrators gave their award on 25 December 1930. According to the award the plaintiff was to continue as usual to be in possession and occupation as the malik of the house in place of Babu Murat Chaudhuri deceased,

(3.) and Badri Chaudhuri was to continue to work according to the instructions of the said Musammat just in the same way as he used to do in his uncle's time.