JUDGMENT

Rachhpal Singh, J. - This is a first appeal from order against the decision of the learned Judge of the Court below dismissing the objections raised by the defendant to the validity of an award made by an arbitrator. The facts which have given rise to the dispute between the parties briefly put are these. Indar Singh and Ganga Dhar are two brothers. Indar Singh made an application for partition of mahal Naubat Singh in the Revenue Court. The Revenue Court proceeded with that application and eventually lots were prepared and drawn. It appears that Ganga Dhar, defendant, drew a lot containing properties which were considered to he batter than the properties which went into the other lot. Thereupon Indar Singh applicant prayed the Collector that he may be permitted to withdraw his application. The Collector granted that application in spite of the objections raised by the opposite party. Ganga Dhar preferred an appeal to the Commissioner and was successful in getting an order under which the decision of the Collector was set aside. There was a further appeal by Indar Singh to the Board of Revenue which was however unsuccessful.

2. On 10th March 1934 Ganga Dhar and Indar Singh entered into an agreement by which they referred the matters in dispute between them to one Karan Singh who is the husband of their sister. In this reference they stated at one place:

Where there is a dispute between us about; the partition of properties moveable and immovable and about the accounts of profits of the property and cash, etc., on account of which there is a danger of litigation in future and which will entail loss and ruin of the parties.

3. At another place it is stated,

and we agree that whatever the arbitrator decides about the assets (tarka) of Naubat Singh, father of the parties, moveable and immovable properties and profits of the properties and cash, etc, from his sense of justice, the same will be acceptable to us like a decision of the Court and no party shall have any objection at any-case and at any time.

4. The arbitrator gave two awards in the case. The first award was made by him on 18th April 1934. The arbitrator decided the dispute between the parties in respect of mahal Naubat Singh and also about profits of the same mahal. A short time after, the arbitrator made a second award under which the other points in dispute between the parties were decided by him. It may be pointed out here that before the second award had been given by the arbitrator the defendant-appellant had sent him a written notice asking him not to take further proceedings in respect of the properties about which no award had been made by him.

5. Indar Singh, plaintiff, made an application in the Court of the learned Civil Judge praying that the award made by the arbitrator be made a rule of the Court. To this application several objections were taken by Ganga Dhar, defendant. In the view which we take of the case it is not at all necessary to refer to all of them. One of them was that no valid award had been made by the arbitrator. It was pleaded that it was not competent to the arbitrator to give his decision about the points in dispute piecemeal as had been done in this case. The contention therefore was that both the awards given by the arbitrator were not valid and therefore the application of the plaintiff should be rejected. The learned Judge of the Court below came to the conclusion that the two awards which, ware given by the arbitrators were quite good and that it was open to the arbitrator to give his decision piecemeal and as under the two awards all the points all widen parties were at variance had been decided the awards were good. It is against that decision that the present appeal has been preferred by the defendant.

6. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides and after consideration of the question have come to the conclusion that the appeal must succeed. Sir Taj who appeared on behalf of the appellant has contended baton us that the award