K.C.AGARWAL,J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal filed under S.39(1) (vi) of the Arbitration Act against the judgment of the First Civil Judge, Meerut, dt. 13th April, 1976, setting aside the award dt. 26th July, 1971, given by Kailash Chand Mittal. The appellant was the head of the joint Hindu family, of which respondents 1 to 12 were the members. These respondents can be grouped into two parties. The first party consisted of the appellant and respondents 1 to 5, whereas the second party consisted of respondents 6 to 12. It is in this fashion that the two sides have been defined in the arbitration agreement dt. 13-5-1971, which led to the award dt. 26-7-1971. On behalf of the first party the appellant had signed the agreement, whereas on behalf of respondents 6 to 12 the agreement was signed by Smt. Sumitra Devi, respondent 6. The arbitrator gave notice of the award on July 26, 1971. He gave copies of the award to both sets of parties, the original remained with the arbitrator.
(2.) AN application under S. 14(2) of the Arbitration Act was filed by the appellant for filing the award in Court and for making the same a rule of the Court. The arbitrator filed the original award, which was paper No. 9-Kha along with the agreement paper No. 10 Kha. The respondents filed objections against this award. One objection was filed by respondents 6, 7 and 9, and the other was filed by respondents 8, 11 and 12. The objection of respondents 8,11 and 12 was that Smt. Sumittra Devi had since not taken permission of the District Judge, she was not entitled or authorised to appoint an arbitrator on their behalf. Respondents 6, 7 and 9 also took a number of objections, including that the arbitrator had misconducted himself by the hearing the first party behind the back of the second party, and that the award was arbitrary. These objections were contested by the appellant by means of a reply. He supported the award by taking the plea that the same did not suffer from any error which could vitiate the same.
(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the learned Civil Judge framed seven issues. Out of these seven issues, the relevant ones are Issues Nos.1, 2, 5 and 6. These issues are being reproduced below :- "1. Whether defendant 6 had no right to refer the matter to arbitration on behalf of the minors without obtaining the permission of the District Judge? If so, its effect? 2. Whether the reference was beyond the powers of the natural guardians for the reasons mentioned in para two of the objections of the opposite parties Nos. 8 to 12?";