LODHA, J.—This is a second appeal by the plaintiff Moolchand whose suit has been dismissed by the District Judge, Ajmer on the ground that it is not main-tainable under the provisions of the Arbitration Act No. 10 of 1940.

2. The facts of the case may be stated within a short compass. The respondent Manakchand obtained a decree for Rs. 8000/- against the appellant Moolchand from the Court of Sub Judge, First Class, Beawar on 10-5-1954 on the basis of an award dated 26-4-1954. This decree was subsequently amended on 30-12-1954. The present suit was filed by Moolchand on 9-5-1955 for setting aside the decree dated 39-12-54 as being fraudulent, null and void. It was alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff Moolchand had neither executed any arbitration agreement in favour of the alleged arbitrator Shri Jagdish Prasad nor there had been any valid award against him. He stated that he was a servant of the defendant at his shop on a monthly salary of Rs. 35/- and had not borrowed any money from Manakchand. It was further alleged that he had not appointed Shri Mukand Chand Ranka as his counsel nor had signed Vakalatnama in the latters favour nor he had made any application for amendment of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document