M. ANANTANARAYANAN, OFFG; C. J. :- This appeal involves a question of considerable interest and some importance, with regard to the impact of S. 34 of the Arbitration Act 10 of 1940, upon a pending suit, wherein the basis of the suit itself is the void nature of the contract between the parties. The facts, tersely stated and as essential for our present purpose, are as follows :

2. The plaintiffs in this action are the Coromandel Engineering Co., (P.) Ltd. In 1956, the Government of India commenced a scheme for a building for the Madras Customs department. Tenders were invited for the construction of certain pile foundations, and the Central Public Works Department also furnished a Bore chart relating to the locality, and indicating the strata of soil at four places, as a result of boring operations. The plaintiffs then made a tender

and entered into a contract with the defendant, viz., the Union of India, represented by the Secretary to Government, Ministry of Works. According to the case of the plaintiffs, for the technical reasons furnished by them in paragraph 12 sub-clauses (a) to (g) of the plaint, the contract itself was void and unenforceable, for a mutual mistake of