It was claimed that Miss Shail was number capable of managing her affairs.
The son, the appellant gave evidence and stated that two houses, one at Meerut and one at Hapur were inher ited by him from his mother Smt.
Further it was recited that disputes and differences had arisen in between them with regard to the immovable as well as movable proper ty left by their father and Shri S. Lal died without making any will and the parties were desirous to get their dis putes and differences settled through arbitration to maintain family peace, harmo ny and goodwill amongst themselves and to avoid unnecessary litigation by arriving at a family settlement through arbitration.
These houses were sold for Rs.21,000 which sum according to Major Kshyap was invested by the father in the companystruction of the house in question.
number Major Ashok Kshyap, the son.
The respondent number 1 filed objections to the same on 11th October, 1977.
Sarla Devi, which she got from her parents without leaving any male issue behind them.
The agreement, thereafter numberinated and ap pointed one Shri D.C. Singhania, Advocate, as the arbitrator and to enter upon reference and to decide all the disputes and differences existing between them pertaining to or relating to or in any manner touching upon the matter of inheritance and or division of all movable and immovable property left behind by their late father, Shri S. Lal.
The arbitration proceedings have been filed before this Court.
In order to appreciate the companytentions urged, it is necessary to numbere few facts.
Major Kshyap and Miss Shail accepted the award before the Deputy Registrar, Delhi High Court on 11th May, 1977.
234 A of 1977 K. Dholkia and P.C. Kapur for the Appellant.
The agreement, further recited that the parties undertook that the decision given by the arbitrator would be accepted as final.
314 of 1987.
The wife of the said deceased Shri S. Lal predeceased him.
F 4, Green Park, New Delhi and some movables including about Rs.8,000 in the Punjab National Bank, Green Park, New Delhi.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
From the judgment and Order dated 16.5.
It may be numbered that disputes and differences arose between the parties and arbitration agreement as entered into by the three parties to settle these on 9th June, 1976, soon after the death of their father, Shri S. Lal.
1986 of the Delhi High Court in Suit No.
The High Court, however, held that the award was number liable to be set aside but only that it companyld number be made a rule of the companyrt.
The said S. Lal left only one immovable property, namely, premises No.
The appeal arises from the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated 16th May, 1986 whereby the award of the Arbitrator was adjudged incapable of being made rule of the companyrt and numberdecree in terms thereof was passed under sec tion 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, hereinafter called the Act .
The father of the parties involved in the matter, Shri S. Lal, died on 13th November, 1975 leaving behind him his two daughters, Mrs. Sudha Va sisht and Miss Shail and Capt.
The arbitration agreement recited that their father died intestate leaving behind him premises No.
The arbitration agree ment was, however, signed by all the three parties.
Manoj Swarup, Ms. Lalitha Kohli and Pramod Dayal for the Respondents.
F 4, Green Park , New Delhi and the sum of Rs.8,000 in the Punjab National Bank.
The award was filed by the Arbitrator on th March, 1977.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. Special leave is granted.
Indeed one of the objections against the award was that Miss Shail who was the unmarried sister of Major Kshyap and Mrs. Sudha Vasisht was of unsound mind and due to her mental incapacity the arbi tration agreement, arbitration proceedings and the resultant award were all bad in the eye of law.
