BAHADUR SINGH Vs. FULESHWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the plaintiff arises out of an application dated the 5th May 1962 for making an award on a reference made outside the Court a rule of the Court, which was registered as a title suit.

(2.) ACCORDING to the plaintiff's case, he and defendant No. 1 entered into a partnership business in which the plaintiff was to supply the capital and to have eleven annas share and defendant No. 1 was to have five annas share. In August 1959, they started a shop of stationery goods in the town of Saharsa. In November 1961, there was a dispute between them and, on the 5th December 1961, they entered into an agreement to refer the matter for arbitration by four arbitrators who were made defendants 2 to 5 to the suit. One of them, Manzar Alam, according to the plaintiff, was to act as the umpire. They executed two documents. Exhibits 1 and 1(a), separately showing that they agreed to refer the case for arbitration. It appears that on the 3rd April 1962, the arbitrators pronounced the award and signed it. It was re-written on stamped paper on the 4th April, 1962 and was registered on the 5th April, 1962. A notice of the award was served on the plaintiff on the 7th April, 1962. Two more persons were made parties to the suit as defendants 6 and 7 who, according to the plaintiff, were merely his benamidars and had nothing to do with the business.

(3.) MR R.S. Chatterji, appearing for the appellant, has argued that, as the objection of defendant No. 1 (respondent No. 1 before this Court and to be referred to as the respondent hereafter) was filed beyond thirty days of the filing of the award it was time barred and that this fact should have been taken into consideration by the Court below and it should have passed a decree in terms of the award. There can be no doubt that the respondent came to know of the filing of the award on the 12th June 1963 when he filed an application for its inspection and his objection was obviously beyond thirty days from that date. Article 158 of the Indian Limitation Act (Act IX of 1908) lays down that an application under the Arbitration Act (Act 10 of 1940) to set aside an award or to get an award remitted for reconsideration must be filed within thirty days from "the date of service of the notice of filing of the award." It was contended by learned counsel for the respondent that, as no notice was served on the respondent in this case, there could be no question of limitation, and reliance was placed on a Bench decision of this court in Deep Narain Singh v. Mt. Dhaneshwari, AIR 1960 Pat 201, where it has been held that, if the required notice is not served, the question of limitation under Article 158 does not arise. In Nilkantha Sidramappa v. Kashinath Somanna, AIR 1962 SC 666, it was observed:--