LADURAM-NATHMULL Vs. NANDALAL KARURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from an order of my learned brother Mr. Justice Rankin, by which it was ordered that the award of the arbitrator appointed in the suit by reason of the order made in the suit and dated the 17th March 1919 be set aside and taken off the file. The learned Judge came to his conclusion on the ground that the condition of the jurisdiction which is given by Clause (1) of the 2nd Schedule to the Civil Procedure Code had not been complied with.

(2.) The suit was brought by one Nandalal Karuri against the Official Assignee of Calcutta, Nilmoney Das who was then an insolvent, and a firm called Laduram-Nath-mull. It appears that Nandalal Karuri was a mortgagor, Nilmoney was the mortgagee and Laduram-Nathmull were submortgagees from Nilmoney.

(3.) The prayers of the suit are set out at page 30 of the paper book in Appeal No. 66 of 1919 and were as follows: "(a) That the said premises Nos. 84.A, 84, 1A, 84 2A and 84.3A. Bowbazar Street, in the town of Calcutta be declared redeemed and discharged from the mortgage or charge effected by virtue of the deposit of title-deeds made on the 7th day of February 1915: (b) That if necessary, all accounts be taken and enquiries made as to this Hon ble Courts may seem fit or necessary and the usual redemption decree be passed in his behalf. (c) That the defendants Laduram-Nathmull, Nilmoney Das and the Official Assignee, or whoever amongst them are or is found to be in custody of the title- deeds deposited as aforesaid on the 7th day of February 1915, be directed to return the same to the plaintiff and do also make over the said memorandum of agreement, dated the said 7th day of February 1915, duly cancelled.