Judgment

KRISHNA IYER, J.- We live and learn from counsels arguments each day and in this case we were asked to unlearn. Counsel for the appellant has objected, in this appeal to the examination, as a witness, of an arbitrator who has given his award on a dispute between the appellant and the 1st respondent. His contention is that, on broad principle and public policy, it is highly obnoxious to summon an arbitrator or other adjudicating body to give evidence in vindication of his award. This is a wholesome principle as is evident from S. 121 of the Indian Evidence Act. That provision states that the Judge or Magistrate shall, except upon the special order of some court to which he is subordinate be compelled to answer any questions as to his own conduct in court as such Judge or Magistrate or as to anything which came to his knowledge in court as such Judge or Magistrate, but he may be examined as to other matters which occurred in his presence whilst he was so acting. Of course, this section does not apply proprio vigore to the situation present here. But it is certainly proper for the court to bear in mind the reason behind this rule when invited to issue summons to an arbitrator.