Dave, J.—This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and final decree passed by the learned Senior Civil judge, Ajmer, on 24th October, 1960.

2. It involves two ticklish questions of law and in order to appreciate them properly, it seems necessary to narrate the facts which have given rise to them,

3. All the four appellants are real brothers, being sons of one Mst. Sardha Devi alias Sardhamani who is no longer alive. Between the years 1936 and 1939, their mother obtained loans from one Ramdhan, father of respondents No. 1 and 2, and executed four mortgage-deeds on different dates. Ramdhan brought a suit for recovery of the entire mortgage-money secured by all the said documents, against the present appellants on 14th March, 1946, in the court of Sub Judge, Ajmer. That suit was at the request of the, parties, referred by the court to the arbitration of two persons, namely, Sri Daya Shanker and Devi Dayal who were respectively counsel for plaintiff and the defendants in the suit. The arbitrators gave their award on 21st December, 1949, The operative portion of the award ran as follows :—

"The plaintiffs claim is deceased for Rs. 5,000/-, principal sum, and Rs. 3,793/- on account of interest up to the date of suit with proportionate costs. Further interest is allowed at 6 per cent per annum only on Rs. 5,000/-. The defendant shall pay the said amount within six months and in case of their default, the mortgage-property shall be sold to satisfy the decretal amount. Usual preliminary decree be framed on these terms."

4. Against the said award, two separate applications were presented by the defendants under sec. 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, for getting it set aside. Those applications were dismissed by the court on 10th December, 1956. On appeal to the court of Judicial Commissioner, Ajmer, it was held that the procedure adopted by the lower court was irregular and so the case was remanded on 19th November, 1953. The Sub-Judge after recording evidence and hearing the parties again rejected the defendants objections on 30th December, 1954. The defendants again appealed in the court of Judicial Commissioner and the order of the Sub-Judge was again set aside and the matter was remanded to his Court on 9th January, 1956. After hearing the parties again the Senior Civil Judge, who was then seized of the case on account of the merger of the State of Ajmer with Rajasthan dismissed the defendants objection on 10th December, 1956, and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs in terms of the award dated 21st December, 1949. Against the order dated 10th December, 1956, refusing to set aside the award, the defendants filed three separate appeals which were heard by a Division Bench of this Court and all those appeals were dismissed by one judgement on 3rd July, 1961.

5. During this pendency of the appeals before this Court, the original plaintiff (decree-holder) died! on 19th February, 1959. The appellants moved an application under O. 22, R. ,4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for substitution of the present respondents as legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff. That application was allowed and they were substituted as legal representatives of deceased Ramdhan in appeals No. 5, 6 and 11 of 1957, of this Court referred above.

6. While the said appeals were pending in this Court, an application was moved by Shri Mukand Ram Garg, Advocate, on 2nd January, 1960, in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Ajmer, for obtaining the final decree under O. 34, R. 5, Civil Procedure Code, directing the sale of the mortgaged-property. On 22nd August, I960, the said Advocate filed another application under O. 22, rr. 3 and 10, C.P.C., praying that the present respondents be impleaded as legal representatives of deceased Ramdhan. These applications were dismissed on 31st August, 1960, on the ground that Shri Mukand Ram Garg was not properly appointed as a counsel and, therefore, they were not maintainable. Thereafter, the respondents filed t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document