Judgment.-This revision petition is filed by the defendants against the order of the District Munsif of Mannargudi accepting the award passed by an arbitrator in O.S.No.177 of 1947 and giving a decree in terms of it in the following circumstances. A suit was filed by the plaintiffs for recovery of possession of properties alleging that they acquired title to two-thirds shares in the plaint house under two sale deeds, Exhibits A-5 and A-6, dated 5th June, 1912 and a settlement deed Exhibit A-10, dated 10th January, 1947 respectively. The suit was contested by the defendants on the grounds covered by the various issues raised in the suit.

While the trial of the suit was proceeding, the parties agreed to refer the matter to the arbitration of one Mohamed Abu Bucker, and a memorandum of agreement was filed into Court setting out the terms of the reference to arbitration. The arbitrator filed his award on 19th November, 1948. The learned District Munsif without giving any time to the parties concerned passed a decree observing that it was conceded that no question of any time for objections to the award, as in the case of reference through Court, arose and that no time for objections was asked for. Against this order of the trial Court accepting the award on the basis of which a decree was passed the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

It is contended in this Civil Revision Petition that the order of the District Munsif accepting the award without allowing the necessary time for the filing of objection is illegal and is opposed to the plain wording of section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Section 17 provides that,

“Where the Court sees no cause to remit the award or any of the matters referred to arbitration for reconsideration or to set aside the award, the Court shall, after the time for making an application to set aside the award has expired, or such application having been made, after refusing it, proceed to pronounce judgment according to the award, and upon the judgment so pronounced a decree shall follow, and no appeal shall lie from such decree except on the ground that it is in excess of, or not otherwise in accordance with, the award.”

It is clear from a perusal of this section that a Court can pass a decree on the award only after the expiry of time to file objections to award. The time provided in Article 158 of the Limitation Act, for objections to the award is 30 days from the notice of the filing of the award, irrespective of the fact whether the parties applied for time or not. It was also urged before me that there was no question of parties applying for time, as the Court took up the matter on the very date on which the award was filed and disposed it off immediately and the parties had no time even to apply for time to file objections to the award. Whether the parties applied for time or not, it is the duty cast upon the Court to allow 30 days time to lapse between the filing of the award and the passing of the decree on the basis of the award. On the face of it, the decree passed by the learned District Munsif without allowing the requisite time to elapse as required under the provisions of section 17 of the Arbitration Act read with Article 158 of the Limitation Act, is illegal and unsustainable. I therefore set aside the decree of the trial Court and direct it to issue the necessary notices to the parties concerned and give them sufficient time to file objections to the award and dispose of the suit according to law.

The Civil Revision Petition is therefore allowed, but in the circumstances of the case I make no order as to costs.

V.S. ----- Petition allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document