SHARFUDDING AHMED, J.

( 1 ) THE short question that fails for determination in this C. R. P. is with regard to the construction to be placed on the powers of General Power of Attorney stated to have been appointed by Konda Aruna (the second respondent) in O. P. No. 19 of 1962. The General Power of Attorney, Fateh Mohammad, is the first respondent and the petitioner in the original petition. Madan Lal is the person in whose favour the agreement has been drawn. Madan Rao filed the petition under Ss. 9 (1) and 8 (2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 praying that the dispute between the parties regarding failure to supply fire wood as agreed to may be referred to a named arbitrator for settlement. His case was that he had entered into an agreement with first respondent who holds the power of attorney on behalf of the second respondent whereunder the agent undertook to supply fire-wood for Rs. 6, 400 within a specified time. The contention is that the respondent failed to supply the fire wood and refund the amount in spite of the notice on behalf of the petitioner. A condition was imposed of the terms of the agreement that in case of dispute, the matter would be referred to arbitration and it

Click Here to Read the rest of this document