Haldhar Singh vs Bulaki Singh

The facts of this case are that on proceedings u/s 145 having been drawn up and parties having appeared in Court, it was agreed that the matter should be referred to arbitration. On the submission of the award by the arbitrators, both sides accepted it and an order was made in accordance with the award which was in favour of the first party. The second party now comes to this Court on the basis of the decisions in the cases of Hamidul Haq v. Ataet Hossain 37 Ind. Cas. 513 : 2 P.L.J. 86 : 1 P.L.W. 81 : 18 Cri`.L.J. 145 and Hari Prasad Tiwari v. Sewak Das 40 Ind. Cas. 333 : 1 P.L.W. 748 : (1917) Pat. 251 : 18 Cri.L.J. 685. We may say at once that we are in entire agreement with the principles of those two decisions; but it is to be noted that in both these cases the parties were not disposed to accept the award when it arrived before the Magistrate. It was, therefore, if we may say so, correct to say that the Magistrate was still required in spite of the award to proceed in accordance with law as prescribed in Section 145, Clause (4). In the case before us the second party acquiesced in the award. It is recorded upon the award itself, "filed by the parties. Second party accepts the decision of the arbitrators." No evidence was offered by the second party. The Magistrate, therefore, proceeded in accordance with Section 145, Clause (4). In the absence of any written statement he perused the statement made by the arbitrators which had been handed to him by the parties jointly, he heard the parties and the only reason why he did not receive evidence may be said to be that there was no evidence to receive. Having heard the second party declare that he accepted the decision of the arbitrators, it was hardly open to him to go outside that statement and to insist upon the production of evidence which the second party had no desire to produce. We are, therefore, of opinion that there was nothing in the proceedings of the Court below to justify our interference.

The application is rejected.