These arbitrators were also subsequently removed, and in their place, Sri S. V. Gupte was appointed the arbitrator.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, D. R. Dhanuka, B. R. Agarwala, and H. K. Puri, for the respondent.
R. Mridul G. L. Sanghi, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
Sri Parasrampuria was subsequently removed, and in his place, two other arbitrators were appointed.
The appellant number appeals to this Court by special leave.
460 of 1965.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated February 21, 1964, of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. This appeal raises a question of companystruction of s. 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940.
The time for making the award was extended by orders of Court from time to time up to March 21, 1958.
Gupte to make the award was rejected by K. K. J. and also by the appellate Court, and that prayer is numberlonger pressed by the appellant.
K. Desai, J. held that in order to attract s. 20, the applicant must prove that the subject matter of the arbitration agreement was number the subject matter of any suit already instituted.
The appellant instituted Suit No.
Two more applications for extension of time were rejected by the Court.
The respondent companytends that the opening words of s. 20 pretender filing of the arbitration agreement dated February 18, 1954, As the agreement was entered into after the institution of a suit with respect to the subject matter of the agreement.
In view of the agreement, the suit was duly withdrawn.
It is obvious that the opening a words admit of more than one meaning.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The prayer for extension of the time of Sri.
On April 3, 1958, the appellant applied to the Court for a the firm of the arbitration agreement under s. 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, b extension of the time of Sri.
1712 of 1949 in the Bombay High Court against the respondent claiming a decree for money said to be due on account of various dealings between the parties.
On or about February 18, 1954, the parties entered into an arbitration agreement for reference of the disputes to the arbitration of Sri Ramrikhdas Parasrampuria.
Sri S. V. Gupte was unable to make the award by March 25, 1958.
Gupte to make the award, c in the alternative, reference of the disputes to some other person, and d an order for exclusion of the time from February 18, 1954 up to April 3, 1958 so as to save the bar of limitation, if any.
58 of 1960.
The agreement also provided for withdrawal of the suit.
The appellate Bench hold that the arbitration agreement having been entered into five years after the institution of the suit, companyld number be said to be an arbitration agreement before the institution of any suit with respect to the subject matter of the agreement as companytemplated by S. 20 1 .
The appellant companytends that 1 s. 20 permits the filing of an arbitration agreement entered into during the pendency of such a suit, if the suit Is number reading when the party applies for the filing, in the alternative 2 s. 20 permits the filing of an arbitration agreement entered into while numbersuch suit is pending, though such a suit might have been instituted previously, and 3 the arbitration agreement dated February 18, 1954 was intended to be operative upon, the withdrawal of the suit and was thus an agreement entered into while the suit was numberlonger pending and it companyld properly be filed Linder s. 20.
Both Courts also rejected the appellants prayer for the filing of the arbitration agreement under S. 20.
