The question in this appeal is whether, by reason of the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, a defendant is precluded from putting forward an award which has been fully performed by him but which was not filed under section 14 and according to which a judgment was not pronounced or a decree given under section 17 of the Act, in answer to the plaintiff’s claim which was the subject-matter of the reference and the award.

The short facts are as follows:The plaintiff, the first respondent here, is the son of one Bayappareddy by his first wife. The appellants who were defendants 1 to 4 in the Court below are Bayappareddy’s sons by his second wife. The fifth, sixth and seventh defendants are respectively the younger brother, the second wife and the mother of Bayappareddy who died on 14th March, 1942. The plaintiff claimed a partition of the suit properties on the ground that the fifth defendant, his uncle, is entitled to a half share, and the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 are entitled to the other half in five equal shares. The plaint mentioned a reference to arbitration made by the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 by an agreement, dated 9th December, 194