Narain Das vs Co-operative Society

Kapur, J.—This is an appeal from a judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court dated 31st December 1948 holding that the appeal ]ay to the District Judge and not to the High Court & thus giving effect to the objection to the forum of appeal raised by the present respondent.

Narain Das appellant entered into an agreement with the Co-operative Society of Lahara village for extraction of resin at a rental of Rs. 11,425/12/6 out of which he paid to the Society Rs. 5600/- and dispute arose in regard to the balance Rs. 5825/12/6. u/s 20, Arbitration Act, the Society made an application to the Court for filing the arbitration agreement. In the heading of this application it stated that the application was under the Indian Arbitration Act, 10 of 1940 in respect of a sum of Rs. 5825/12/6. In para. 4 of the petition the applicant stated that Rs. 5600 had been received from the then respondent and that Rs. 5825/12/6 were due from him. Mr. Har Charan Das, Sub Judge, 1st Class, Una, by an order dated 12th April 1948 ordered'' the agreement to be filed. Against this order an appeal was brought to this Court and objection was successfully taken that the appeal should have been taken to the District Judge. An appeal against this judgment has been brought by the respondent Narain Das. ;

''Court'' is defined in Section 2(c), Arbitration Act as follows:

"(c) ''Court'' means a civil Court having jurisdiction to decide the questions forming the subject-matter of the reference if the same had been subject-matter of a suit, but does not, except for the purpose of arbitration proceedings u/s 21, include a Small Cause Court."

As I read it, it means that all proceedings under the Arbitration Act will have to be taken to the Court which would have jurisdiction to decide the question which formed the subject- matter of the reference and the subject-matter In the present case is over Rs. 5000 and there- tore the application was rightly made in the Court of a Sub Judge 1st Class, u/s 39 of the Act ah appeal lies from the orders therein given to the Court authorised by law to hear appeals from original decrees of the Court passing the order. If the applicant had brought a suit for the sum which he has stated in his application to be due from the respondent (now appellant) the appeal would lie to the High Court whatever the amount decreed by the .trial Court. I am of the opinion that if Sections 2(c) and 39 are read together the appeal against an order passed in the present application would lie to this Court and not to the Court of the District Judge. I would, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the judgment of the learned single Judge. The appellant will have his costs of the Letters Patent Appeal. The case will be set down for hearing in the list before a single Judge.

Soni, J.

I agree.