The Arbitration Act, 1940 does not apply to statutory arbitration under Section 7-B of the Telegraph Act.

R. N. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) PLAINTIFF has carried this second appeal against the confirming judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge of Cuttack in a suit for recovery of Rs. 5,000/- by way of damages.

( 2 ) PLAINTIFF claims that he is a renowned businessman of Cuttack and was subscriber of a telephone bearing No. CK 431 which had also an extension being CK 431-A. He had been regularly clearing the bills issued by the department against these telephone connections. On 8-9-1965, the telephones were disconnected on the plea of non-payment of telephone bills. When the plaintiff enquired, he was served with a demand note for a sum of about Rs. 1,400/ -. Plaintiff disputed the correctness of the demand and ultimately a corrected demand note for a sum of Rs. 795. 80 paise was given to him. This amount plaintiff paid on 31-5-1966 under receipt No. 9887 and asked for restoration of the connections. The Postmaster General (defendant No. 1)directed restoration of connection, but in spite of his order actual reconnection was not effected until the suit was filed on 20th of February, 1968. During the pendency of the suit, the telephone connection was restored. Though at the time of filing of the suit plaintiff had asked for a mandatory injunction for restoration of the connection, the claim for that relief has since been dropped in view of the pendente lite restoration of service. Plaintiff claimed that he had sustained loss of business as also loss of prestige on account of unlawful disconnection of the telephone and illegal withholding of re-connection in spite of his paying the arrear dues as demanded.

( 3 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 3 filed a joint written statement and pleaded that the suit was not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 7-B of the indian Telegraph Act of 1885. They further pleaded that restoration was directed on two conditions, namely that the reconnection fee was to be paid by the plaintiff and that the rental for the period the telephone remained disconnected on account of non-payment of rent would also be paid by the subscriber. The defendants pointed out that the plaintiff never gave the undertaking as required under the departmental rules and restoration of connection was not possible as a spare cable was not available in the area where the telephone connection had to be restored. Several other factual averments were also made.

( 4 ) THE learned Additional Subordinate Judge who tried the suit came to hold that the plaintiff had failed to tender the declaration required by order of defendant No. 1 dated 2-7-1966 and, therefore, he was not entitled to restoration of connection. He further found that the plaintiff had failed to establish his claim for damages. The suit was dismissed.

( 5 ) IN appeal, two grounds were mainly raised: (i) there was no provision for calling for a declaration as directed by defendant No. 1 and (ii) there was evidence in support of the claim for damages and on the basis of such evidence, plaintiff's suit should have been decreed. The learned Additional District Judge negatived the first contention by holding that the departmental rule required a declaration as demanded and the plaintiff failed to furnish the same. He also found that the pleading for damages and, the evidence in support of the plea fell far short of the legal requirement to establish a claim for, special damage as prayed for and, therefore, plaintiff was not entitled to the reliefs as claimed. This affirming decree of the learned Additional District Judge is now assailed in second appeal.

( 6 ) MR. Mohanty for the appellant no more contends that plaintiff's claim for special damage is maintainable. According to him, however, on the materials placed on the record, a decree for general damage should have been granted on the footing that the disconnection was unauthorised and restoration of the connection had been withheld without justification even if the plaintiff had paid the dues and satis