Judgement

SIKRI, J.: This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and decree of the Full Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Civil Special Appeal No. 5 of 1949, and arises out of a suit filed by the appellant, Seth Gulabchand, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, against heirs and legal representatives of Seth Govindram Seksaria, on the original side of the High Court of the former Indore State of specific performance of an agreement, dated February 28, 1941, entered into between the plaintiff and the deceased Govindram. Sanghi, J., decreed the suit on June 11, 1948. Against this judgment and decree, the defendants filed an appeal to a Division Bench of the Madhya Bharat High Court and the plaintiff also preferred a cross appeal. The Division Bench accepted the defendants appeal, reversed the judgment and decree of Sanghi, J., and dismissed the plaintiff s suit as also his cross appeal. Thereafter the plaintiff filed an appeal under S. 25 of the Madhya Bharat High Court of Judicature Act, 1949, as it stood before it was amended by Madhya Bharat Act No 3 of 1950. When this appeal came up for hearing before a Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, a preliminary objection as to the competency of the appeal was taken on behalf of the defendants-respondents. The Full Bench held that the appeal was not competent, but this Court, on appeal, held that the appeal was competent and remitted the case to the High Court for decision on merits, On remand the Full Bench upheld the decision of the Division Bench and dismissed the appeal. The matter is now before us.

2. In view of the arguments urged before us by the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. C. B. Agarwala, it is not necessary to give in detail the history of the disputes between the parties, or all the points that were debated before the High Court. To appreciate the arguments addressed to us it is only necessary to give the following facts.

3. Govindram Seksaria, Brijlal Ramjidas, Bilasrai Joharmal and four other persons entered into a deed of partnership on July 17, 1935 for carrying on the business of acting as Managing Agents and Selling Agents of Indore Malwa United Mills Ltd., a company owning a textile mill in Indore. Serious disputes arose between the partners. The Board of Directors of the Company appointed a Committee in November 1940 to enquire into certain allegations made against Govindram Seksaria, Brijlal and Bilasrai. The Committee consisted of Mr. R. C. Jall as Chairman, and Seth Hiralal and the plaintiff as members. In the meantime, the partners referred their differences to the arbitration of Col. Dina Nath, the Prime Minister of the former Holkar State. On February 8, 1941, the Arbitrator gave an award, inter alia deciding that Govindram Seksaria should buy up the five-annas share of Brijlal Ramjidas and Bilasrai Joharmal at par and that the latter should sell their respective shares of annas two and a half each in the rupee at par and also sell the debentures held by them to Govindram Seksaria at par. On February 12, 1941, Brijlal and Bilasrai instituted a suit in the Bombay High Court against Govindram and other partners of the Managing Agency contesting the validity of the award made by Col. Dina Nath. They failed before the Bombay High Court and ultimately before the Privy Council. On November 5, 1947, a deed of assignment of the four-annas share of Brijlal and Bilasrai was executed in favour of the defendants as legal representatives of Govindaram, who had died in the meantime in May 1946. On November 6, 1947, the plaintiff instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises.

4. Various issues were raised in this suit but it is only necessary to mention issue No. 4, which was as follows:

"Was the agreement to sell the two and a half annas share a bribe offered by the deceased Seth Govindram to the plaintiff to write a report favourable to him, the plaintiff being a member of the Committee of three persons appointed by the