( 1 ) THOUGH this appeal is set down for orders, by consent of both sides, we heard it finally and disposed of by the following order.

( 2 ) THE appellant has questioned the correctness of the order passed in O. S. 267/88 dated 9-2-1989 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Hubli, rejecting the application for staying the suit. It may be necessary to mention here that by a perusal of Clause 5 of the agreement entered into between the parties in the instant case, it is seen that both parties were agreed for referring the dispute arising out of the partnership firm to the arbitrator. Class (5) reads thus :-"that in case of dispute amongst the partners or their legal representatives or successors either of the relating to the interpretation of the terms and conditions of this deed concerning any matter or touching the partnership before or after the termination of the said partnership business, the same shall be referred to Two Independent persons and their decision is binding or conclusive upon all the partners and legal heirs and representatives or successors as the case may be. "

( 3 ) WHEN the respondents filed the suit before the court below, the appellant enga