KIRTY, J. :- This appeal by the plaintiffs arises out of Suit No. 203 of 1953 instituted on 25th August, 1953. Two reliefs were sought by the plaintiffs; one was for a decree for Rs. 1,48,532/- with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of six per cent per annum, while the other was in respect of half share of the plaintiffs in certain assets. It was prayed that a commissioner be appointed for purposes of ascertaining the amount due to the plaintiffs in respect of such assets. The suit was contested by both the defendants and was dismissed in toto by the trial Court.

2. The material facts briefly are as follows:-

The parties to the suit belong to two well-known business families of Kanpur. They may be described as Singhanias and Guptas respectively. Admittedly, the Singhanias and Guptas for a number of years jointly carried on several business enterprises. One of such business enterprises was carried on under the name and style of M/s. India Supplies - a registered firm of which admittedly the two plaintiffs and the two defendants were partners. Certain disputes having arisen between the Singhanias and the Guptas, they agreed to have their disputes, not only in regard to the affairs of M/s. India Supplies but in regard to many enterprises as well, settled by arbitration. Accordingly, they entered into an arbitration agreement referring all the disputes to the sole arbitration of Sri Kanhaiya Singh. Besides the parties to the suit No. 203 of 1952, a number of other persons belonging to the families of Singhanias and Guptas, were also parties to the arbitration agreement. Admittedly, the abovenamed arbitrator gave an award dated 18th January. 1944. This was a composite award by which the disputes regarding each business or enterprises were separately dealt with. It appears that an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act was filed for making the award the rule of the Court. It further appears that certain objections were filed against the award. The application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act appears to have been registered as Original Suit No. 31 of 1954 in the Court of Civil and Sessions Judge, Kanpur. This application was filed on 5th May, 1944, It was prayed therein that a decree be passed in terms of the award. In the proceedings initiated by the application under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act, the parties appear to have entered into a compromise, and, as a result of this compromise, the Court ultimately passed a consent decree. Although the decree has been termed as a consent decree, in pith and substance, however, it is a decree based on the award dated 18-1-1944. We are, however, concerned only with that part of the decree which incorporated the award given by the arbitrator in respect of M/s. India Supplies. The substantial question for decision in this appeal, apart from legal questions, is the construction of the award.

3. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed a number of issues. Out of them, the following only need mention:-

1. Whether award between parties dissolved 'India Supplies' or directed plaintiffs to retire on payment of Rs. 50,000/- and other sums? If so, its effect?

2. Whether plaintiffs are entitled to claims mentioned in Schedule 'A' given at the foot of the plaint in the light of award? If so, effect and amount?

3. Whether suit is barred by limitation?

4. On Issue No. 1, the trial court recorded a finding that the firm M/s. India Supplies had not been dissolved but by the award the plaintiffs were deemed to have retired from the partnership. The court below, however, further held that the effect of retirement of the plaintiffs was that the firm in question was to be deemed to have been dissolved with effect from 18-1-1944. On Issue No. 2, the Court below held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the amount claimed as per Schedule 'A'. This finding was based on the interpretation of the relevant part of the award. On the third issue, the court below