GOKHALE H.L., J.:---This appeal under Letters Patent by the original petitioners seeks to challenge the order and judgment dated 15th October, 1997 passed by a Single Judge in a petition under section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The petitioners and the respondents are the heirs of one Shri Vinayakrao Venkatesh Wagh who died intestate on 11th November, 1958. One of the sons of this Shri Vinayakrao viz. Mahabaleshwar (since deceased and the predecessor-in-title of respondents Nos. 1-A to 1-C herein) filed Suit No. 2794 of 1990 for administration of the estate of late Shri Vinayakrao, wherein all others in the present proceedings (or their predecessors-in-title) being other heirs were joined as defendants. Consent terms were arrived at in that suit and all the disputes in the said suit between the parties were referred to a sole arbitrator by an order in terms of consent terms in that suit passed on 15th March, 1991. The arbitrator gave his Award on 16th June, 1997. The Award of the learned Arbitrator was sought to be set aside by these appellants through the arbitration petition, which came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge by the impugned order, and hence, this appeal.

2. Principally three contentions have been raised in this appeal and which are as follows:-

(A) The learned Single Judge erred in ignoring that the claim was barred by limitation.

(B) The learned Single Judge erred in ignoring that there was an error apparent on the face of the Award in two of the directions given by the learned Arbitrator under which he had directed some of the appellants to pay certain amounts personally (and not from the share of the estate of the deceased coming to their hands).

(C) The learned Single Judge erred in ignoring that the Award was in excess of jurisdiction or authority of the arbitrator inasmuch as he has exercised powers which were exclusively available to the Court of Small Causes under the Bombay Rent Act and which jurisdiction he did not have.

3. Brief facts leading to this controversy are as follows:-

A. Heirs and legal representatives of the deceased.

The above-referred Shri Vinayakrao died intestate on 11th November, 1958 leaving behind him as his only heirs and legal representatives the following persons:-

5 Sons:-

1. Nilkanth- Died on 9-1-1978. No issues. Not a party to suit.

2. Raghavendra- Died on 12-3-1996. Heirs are respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

3. Brahmesh- Died on 14-4-1993. Heirs are the appellants Nos. 1 to 6.

4. Mahabaleshwar-Died 1-2-2000. Heirs are respondent Nos. 1-A to 1-C. His wife Sheela-respondent No. 1-A died on 29-1-2001.

5. Vyankatesh-Appellant No. 7.

5 daughters:-

1. Kamlabai Tinaikar-Died on 9-12-2000. Heirs are respondent Nos. 7-A to 7-J.

2. Sushilabai J. Karande-Died on 24-5-1994. Heir is respondent No. 6.

3. Bhimabai V. Wagh-Died on 18-10-1996. Not a party to the suit.

4. Radhika M. Dhume-Respondent No. 8.

5. Mangala V. Wagh-Died on 6-9-2000. Original respondent No. 9. Hence deleted.

B. Properties left behind by the deceased:

Late Shri Vinayakrao was a reputed Sculptor of Mumbai and had set up a studio known as "Wagh's Fine Art Studio" (for short, "WFAS") at Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai. He left behind various properties. The properties, for the administration of which the above-referred suit was filed by one of his sons Shri Mahabaleshwar Wagh, were as follows:-

(1) The business of WFAS, which was being carried on in premises admeasuring about 800 square feet and consisting of two shop-rooms and two attached rooms situated at Beach View, N.A. Purandare Marg, Chowpatty, Girgaum, Mumbai 400007.

(2) Gala No. 19 (since numbered as Gala No. 11) situated at Charing Cross Compound, 164 Senapati Bapat Marg, Matunga, Mumbai 400 016.

(3) One room at Govalia Tank behind Mahavir Jain Vidyalaya, Mumbai.

(These properties were taken as tenancies. The rent receipts of these three premises were in the name of WFAS).

(4) A residential flat admeasuring about 1200 square feet on the Ground Floor of the above-referred Beach