Judgement

Appeal (No. 29 of 1944), by special leave, from a decree of the High Court (September 8, 1939), which set aside a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Cawnpore (November 3, 1933), passed in a partition suit and sent the case back to the Subordinate Judge with directions to re-admit it under its original number and to decide it in accordance with law.

The following facts are taken from the judgment of the Judicial Committee. The question for decision in this appeal was whether a reference to arbitration made in this suit, and an award made thereon, were valid, as the Subordinate Judge held, or invalid, as the High Court held in appeal. The question arose in the following circumstances. The plaintiff (appellant) brought this suit for division of the property of a Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara. The plaintiff was the son of one Mukta Prasad, and the first three adult defendants (first three respondents), Kallu Lal, Sohan Lal and Sewak Lal were the sons of the only brother of Mukta Prasad, whilst the fourth and fifth defendants (respondents Nos. 4 and 5), Ram Lal and Jainarain, were the minor sons of Kallu Lal. The plaintiff alleged that the family had separated in sta