JUDGMENT

Walsh, J. - We are in the difficult position in this case of having come to the conclusion that we ought to reverse the decision of the learned Judge, although so far as the judgment which he has delivered is concerned, we can see no possible answer to it. We do not say that he is wrong in anything that he has said or ruled in the course of his judgment. Indeed it is a careful and accurate judgment, but the result is abortive, and we think that he has omitted to exercise a jurisdiction which this Act conferred upon him which in the very exceptional circumstances of this case he might, if he had seen his way clear to do so, have exercised himself and which we are prepared to exercise. All parties seem to be agreed that the attempt to arbitrate through the assistance or guidance of the Delhi Piece-Goods Association has, in this particular case, been, speaking of it as reasonably as one possibly can, a comparative failure. It has always been understood that commercial men were satisfied, particularly in regard to special kinds of goods the description of which and the contract in relation to which are full of trade technicalities, that they were able to supply themselves with justice cheaper, speedier, more satisfactory and more certain than they could get from any of His Majesty's Judges. If the experiences of the parties in this particular litigation may be taken as representing the normal experience of persons who indulge in this special form of litigation, one may be disposed to ask oneself whether the view which we have attempted to express and which is no doubt the explanation of the existence of the Arbitration Act upon the statute book, will continue to be held very long. The parties have been endeavouring for the last four years or so, with the assistance of an exceptionally complicated set of rules, and with every variety of Arbitrator and Umpire, to arrive at a final decision. Three documents have seen the light, which may be described as awards, and although the circumstances which gave them birth were to a large extent identical, their appearance on the face of them when they are set side by side, presents a contrast which can only be described as unusual. In one of them the figure was placed at Rs. 16,000, in a later production it re-appeared as Rs. 6,559 and within an hour or so it became Rs. 4,017. We have been almost inevitably influenced during the consideration of this case by the reflection that, if we were to yield to the plausible argument of Dr. Sen, and uphold the view taken by the learned Judge of the Court below, and allow the parties to seek a fresh award, (presumably as long as the reference exists and the parties are not ad idem, neither of them can sue the other with any hope of success), the result might be further to diminish the greatly attenuated claim which the representatives of the Delhi Piece-Goods Association have held that his client is entitled to recover. We have therefore decided in the best interests of the parties themselves, to take a course which we have not the slightest doubt the Legislature intended should be taken where the circumstances render it appropriate, although in doing so we would merely point out that we are influenced by the exceptional circumstances of this case and that it must not be taken as a precedent for future cases. The last -stage of these proceedings was taken by an Umpire, Mr. Gray, appointed by the Delhi Piece-Goods Association. Having made an award he deposited it with his Association who were no doubt acting as his agents for that purpose, and gave notice to the parties and supplied a copy to the present appellant. Somehow or other, (it does not appear quite clearly, but it is not suggested that this constituted any irregularity in itself) the parties or party drew the Umpire's attention to an error on the face of the award. So clear was the idea that he had formed of the rights of the parties that no sooner did he look at his award than he saw t