MATHER v. TAMOTHARAM PILLAI.

MATHER v. TAMOTHARAM PILLAI.

D. C., Jaffna, 8,429.

Partition, suit-Reference to arbitration-Ordinance No. 10 of 1860-Ordinance No. 15 of 1866-Civil Procedure Code, s. 691.

A partition suit is not a mere proceeding inter partes to be settled of consent, or by the opinion of the Court upon such points as they choose to submit to it in the shape of issues. It is a matter in which the Court must satisfy itself that the plaintiff has made out his title, and unless he makes out his title his suit for partition must be dismissed.

In partition proceedings the paramount duty is cast by the Ordinance upon the District Judge himself to ascertain who are the actual owners of the land. As collusion between the parties is always possible, and as they get their title from the decree of the Court, which is made good and conclusive as against the world, no loopholes should be allowed for avoiding the performance of the duty so cast upon the Judge.

In enacting the Ordinance No. 15 of 1866, the Legislature did not confer on a Judge power to refer the matters in dispute in a partition suit to arbitration.

The award of an arbitrator given upon such a refe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document