Gulabchand Chunnilal vs The Tijarti Chamber Saraffan Beawar

Nigam, J.C.

The Tijarti Chamber Saraffan, Beawar, through Rajmal, Secretary, filed S.C.C. Suit No. 554 of 1950 against Gulabchand claiming a decree for Rs. 166/8/9 with interest pendente lite and future. A reference was made to an arbitrator, Shri S.P. Mehra. The arbitrator decreed the suit for Rs. 142/4/6. Gulab Chand filed certain objections which are now at pages 13 and 14 of the record. The learned Judge, Small Causes, Beawar, dismissed the objections and directed the preparation of a decree in terms of the award. Against that order, Gulab Chand defendant has come up in revision. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

The learned counsel for the applicant has urged that the learned trial Judge was wrong in holding that it was not necessary for the arbitrator to give a finding on each of the issues framed by him. The learned counsel has referred me to -- ''Gaja Sinhva Rao v. Sujat Ali'', AIR 1952 Hyd 46 (A) and urges that it was incumbent on the arbitrator to decide all the questions of differences referred to him and on his failure to do so, the award is bad and unenforceable. The learned counsel for opposite party has referred me to -- AIR 1940 186 (Lahore) which lays down:

An arbitrator is not bound by the technical rules of procedure which the Court must follow, nor need he record separate findings on the various points on which the parties are at issue, or write a reasoned judicial decision. All that he is required to do is to give an intelligible decision which determines the rights of parties in relation to the subject matter of the reference.

I have also been referred to -- ''Madan Lal v. Nabi Bukhsh'', AIR 1947 Lah 177 (C) which lays down:

There is no rule of law that an arbitrator must decide all the issues framed in the suit expressly as long as the whole suit is decided by him.

It, therefore, appears to me that while the arbitrator must give a specific finding on each of the separate claims referred to him, he need not give a specific finding on each of the issues necessary for the just decision of a particular claim.

In that view, I am of opinion that the arbitrator has not been guilty of any misconduct. He decided the matter between the parties and decreed the claim of Rs. 166/8/9 for an amount of Rs. 142/4/6. The question whether the plaintiff was entitled to maintain the suit and whether the claim was barred by time must, in the circumstances of the case, be held to have been decided against the defendant as without such a decision, the decree could not have been granted in favour of the plaintiff.

No other point has been pressed before me.

Accordingly, I see no force in this revision application and dismiss it with costs.