Law: Court-Fees Act, 1870

Section: 11

(a) Court Fees Act (VII of 1870)  Art. 11, Sched. II and Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Ss. 30 & 39..Order setting aside or refusing to set side an award under sec tion 30 of Act X of 1940Not a decreeAppeal against such order, held, maintainable.[Appeal (civil)]. Ram Autar v. Rum Samujh A I R 1932 Oudh 282 and Mrs. Mumtaz Mallik v. Taxing Officer P L D 1969 Dacca 803 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)  S. 115 and Arbitration Act (X of 1940), S. 10 (3)-Revisional jurisdiction-Question whether adequate opportunity provided to applicant to fully cross-examine respondent when his statement recorded by Umpire-Question, held, not such as to be examined in revisional jurisdiction. Date of hearing : 23rd October, 1979.                                                                                                               JUDGMENT This revision application arises out of the following facts. On 21st July 1964 the respondent filed Suit No. 367/1964 against the applicant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6,713.70. During the pendency of the suit the subject matter of dispute in the suit was referred to two Arbitrators. However, the two Arbitrators differed in their decision, consequently the matter was referred to the Umpire Mr. Abdul Karim Siddiqui for decision. After hearing the parties the Umpire gave his award on 22nd December, 1967 directing that the applicant pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 6,692.20 with 6 % interest from the date of suit until payment. When the award was filed in the Court the applicant submitted objections and prayed for setting aside of the order. The learned- trial Court, how ever, dismissed the objections filed by the applicant and by order dated 3rd May, 1968 refused to set aside the award directing that the decree be passed in terms thereof. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order the applicant filed appeal under section 39 of the Arbitration Act before…