The main legal point established in the judgment is that the award acquires the status of a decree only when a certificate is granted by the Registrar, and the application for execution of the award must be filed within the prescribed time.

VENKATA RAMAIYA, J.

( 1 ) A question of limitation as regards the enforcement of an award passed under the Mysore cooperative Societies Act, is raised in this case. As the point involved is considered to be of importance and the decision is likely to affect other proceedings the case has been referred to a division Bench. The award enforcement of which is objected to as being barred by time was passed on 17-12-1934. On a certificate issued by the Registrar under Section 43, Co-operative Societies act on 24-11-1942 for execution of the Award in the Civil Court, Execution Case No. . 1544 of 42-43 was filed in Hassan Munsiff's Court on 24-5-1943 against the petitioner. No money was realised and the case was dismissed on 4-2-1944. Subsequently on a second certificate dated 25-5-1948 by the Registrar, Execution No. 1470/45-48 was filed in the Court of Small Causes, bangalore. The petitioner objected to the execution but the objections were overruled in an order of 16-1-1947. Against this order he filed C. R. P. 341 of 1946-47 in this Court. During the pendency of the Revision Petition, there was a compromise as per rajinama filed on 4-12-1947 and the revision petition was dismissed on 5-1-1948. The amount payable according to the rajinama not having been paid by the petitioner, the respondent Society filed Execution No. 1092 of 48-49 and Execution No. 443/49-50. These were dismissed for default on 24-3-1949 and 2-3-1950 respectively. Thereafter Execution No. 1301-50-51 was filed on 5-1-1951 and the correctness of the order holding this to be in time is now challenged.

( 2 ) SECTION 43 (c), Co-operative Societies Act 7 of 1918 provides:

"every order psssed. . . . . by the Registrar or his nominee or arbitrators on disputes referred to him or them under Section 43 (A) shall, if not carried out, (a) be executed on a certificate signed by the Registrar. . . . . by any Civil Court in the same manner as a decree of such Court. . . . . "

According to the decisions in -- 44 Mys H. C. R. 528 (A) and -- 47 Mys H. C. R. 230 (B)', the period of time within which execution may be applied for is three years under Article 181, schedule I of the Limitation Act and time begins to run not from the date of the Award but from the date on which the certificate is granted. There is reference in -- 47 Mys H. C. R. 230 (3)', to the view in --'subba Rao v. Calicut Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. ', AIR 1939 Mad 304 (C), that article 182 and not Article 181 is applicable to such a, case and to -- 'subba Rao v. Calieat co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. ', AIR, 1940 Mad 635 (D), wherein that view was upheld in appeal. The view of the Bombay High Court in -- 'raghavendra Hanmant Rao v. Industrial Bank, guledgud', AIR 1936 Bom 396 (E), to wlrch importance seems to have been attached on account of the similarity between the Acts in Mysore and Bombay has been explained in ether cases as not a clear authority to show that Article 181 is applicable to the enforcement of awards. In two cases -- 'bhimsen Hanmant v. Urban Bank, Muddebihal', AIR 1947 Bom 370 (P) and -' muppanna Malkappa v. Shree Gajanan Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. ', AIR 1947 Bom 375 (G), it has been definitely held, after a review of the cases bearing on the point that Article 182 is applicable. To the same effect is the decision in --'anjuman Imdad Bahmi Qarza v. Imam Din', air 1947 Lah 269 (H), where an award of 1937 was sought to be executed in 1943, after a number of applications in the interval, Mahajan J. in the course of the judgment referred to the words "enforce it as if it were a judgment" as being synonymous with "enforced in the same manner as a judgment" and to Section 190, Indian Companies Act containing the same words and observed

". . . . . the Courts below and the learned single Judge were in error when to the enforcement of the award in question Article 181, Limitation Act was applied. The article applicable is Article 182 read with Section 48, Civil P. C. " reference is made in those case

Click Here to Read the rest of this document