Ramaswami, J.

1. In the suit which is the subject of this appeal the plaintiff alleged that he had advanced RS. 230 to the defendants on the basis of an unregistered ijara, that he obtained possession of the land mortgaged but on a subsequent date the defendants looted the paddy crops which he had grown. The parties referred the matter to arbitrators who made an award. The plaintiff claimed that according to the award he was entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 280 with interest from the defendants. The ground of defence was that there was no reference to arbitration and no award was made by the alleged arbitrators. The defendants alleged that the award-even if made was fraudulent and collusive and in any case could not be enforced since there was an agreement to stifle prosecution and the consideration was illegal. The learned Munsif accepted the defence case and dismissed the suit. But in appeal the learned Subordinate Judge held that there was no agreement to stifle prosecution and the plaintiff was entitled to enforce the award. The learned Subordinate Judge accordingly pronounced decree in favour of the plaintiff.

2. On behalf of the respondent, a preliminary objection was