A decree passed in accordance with an award under the Arbitration Act, 1940, can be challenged only by way of an appeal under section 17 of the Act, and not by way of an application under sections 151 and 152 of the Civil Procedure Code.

PRITAM SINGH SAFEER, J.

( 1 ) -THIS petition preferred TO against the order dated the 28th of August, 1964, made by the Sub-Judge First Class, Delhi, faces a preliminary objection. It is urged that the petition preferred TO under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code is not maintainable because the remedy open to the petitioners was by way of an appeal as envisaged by section 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, and ignoring the said remedy the petitioners had started the proceedings by filling an application under sections 151 and 152 of the Civil Procedure Code.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the preliminary objection and the contentions otherwise raised before me, it is necessary that the circumstances leading to the present petition be taken into account.

DISPUTES having arisen between the parties, they agreed to refer the same to arbitration. The sole arbitrator made his award on the 20th of December, 1962. The first decision recorded in the award is:-

"1. That as agreed and admitted by the parties in their statements before me, I award that the respondents do pay to the Industrial Credit Company Limited a sum of Rs. 83,000. 00 (Eighty three thousand only) with further interest at 12 per cent per annum from 20-12-62 till realisation. "the second item in the award was:-

2. That the respondents shall also pay to the Industrial Credit Company Limited Rs. 675. 00 (six hundred and seventy five only) as costs of these proceedings. "

AFTER the award was made an application was filed under section 14 of the Arbitration Act by the arbitrator himself on the 26th of December, 1962.

THE parties appeared before the court and on the 3rd of January, 1963, the following statement of the counsel for the parties was recorded:-

"a decree for Rs. 83,675. 00 be passed in favour of the claimants against the respondents. "the statement was signed by the counsel for the parties. The record discloses that the following order was passed by the court after recording the aforequoted statement :-

"the award is made a rule of court and a decree for Rs. 83,675. 00 is passed in favour Industrial Credit against respondents. "in consequence of the aforesaid order a decree was drawn. The original decree has been seen by me. The printed form used at its top contains the following words:-

"simple MONEY DECREE (Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure)". The decree was passed in the following terms:-

"it is ordered that the award is made a rule of the court and a decree for Rs. 83,675. 00 is passed in favour of Industrial Credit against the respondents. "

( 3 ). The Industrial Credit, Company, Limited, thereafter filed an. application under section 151, and 152 of the Civil Procedure Code under the date 8th of April, 1964, urging that the decree was passed with the consent of all the parties who had specifically agreed to pay future interest at 12 per cent per annum. Paragraph 2 of the application is:-

"that the above said decree is based on consent and all the parties had specifically agreed to pay future interest @ 12% per annum. "in paragraphy 3 of the application it was urged:-

"that since the parties had admitted and agreed to pay future interest at the rate of 12% per annum and the court had made the entire award a rule of the court and so the decree holders are entitled to get the interest. "the applicants prayed that the mistake be rectified and the office of the Executive Engineer be directed to send the amount of interest from the date of the decree till the date of payment @ 12 per cent per annum and that the records be amended and corrected accordingly.

( 4 ) THE respondents filed their reply to the said application, in paragraph 2 whereof they urged that the parties never agreed to pay any future interest. As to the award being made the rule of the court in paragraph 3 of their reply the respondents stated:-

"para No. 3, is denied. The court never made the entire award the rule of the court. On the other hand, the court could not make the entire award the rule

Click Here to Read the rest of this document