[1954] EACA 61
The Court held that Order 50, rule 1 applies to the situation where a suit is stood over generally and the parties agree to refer the matter to arbitration. In such circumstances, bringing the matter up by motion is not improper and is, in fact, the correct procedure. The Court distinguished between cases where the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1954] EACA 61
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Santa Singh; Defendant: Avtar Singh
- Court
- East African Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Civil Suit No. 1178 of 1952
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Motion for Implementation of Arbitration Reference
- Outcome
- motion granted
- Judges
- Rudd J
- Legal Topics
- Arbitration Reference, Motion Practice, Court Orders Under Arbitration, Procedure for Standing Over, Competency of Motion
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Santa Singh
Plaintiff
Avtar Singh
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Motion for Implementation of Arbitration Reference
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a motion for the Court to implement an arbitration reference is competent under Order 50, rule 1 of the Civil Procedure (Revised) Rules, 1948.
- 2 Whether the proper procedure for implementing an arbitration agreement when a suit is stood over generally is by motion.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that Order 50, rule 1 applies to the situation where a suit is stood over generally and the parties agree to refer the matter to arbitration. In such circumstances, bringing the matter up by motion is not improper and is, in fact, the correct procedure. The Court distinguished between cases where the agreement to arbitrate is made during the hearing, in which case a formal motion may be dispensed with, and cases where the suit is stood over generally, where a motion is appropriate. The objection to the competency of the motion was therefore overruled.
Court Disposition
motion granted
Orders
- The motion for the Court to implement the arbitration reference is granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
11 paragraphs
## ORIGINAL CIVIL
Before Rudd, J.
#### SANTA SINGH, Plaintiff
# ν. AVTAR SINGH, Defendant
# Civil Suit No. 1178 of 1952
## Civil Procedure and Practice—Civil Procedure (Revised) Rules, 1948—Suit stood over generally on agreement to arbitrate—Motion for reference to be implemented by order of Court—Order 50, rule 1—Whether competent.
A suit was taken out of the hearing list and stood over generally, by agreement of parties, to arbitrate. A reference was prepared and signed. The plaintiff applied, by motion, for an order of the Court that the reference be implemented. The defendant objected to the competency.
Held (13-7-54).—Order 50, rule 1 applied. The parties had agreed to refer the matter to arbitration and the proper course to obtain an order for the Court to implement the reference was to apply by motion.
Handa for applicant.
D. N. Khanna for respondent.
ORDER.—This suit was taken out of the hearing list and stood over generally on 23rd June, 1954. The parties agreed to refer their difference to arbitration and a reference was prepared and signed. Mr. Handa for the plaintiff brought a motion for the reference to be implemented by an order of the Court. Mr. Khanna objects that a motion for such purpose is unnecessary and incompetent. He agrees the matter has to be dealt with in open Court. In my opinion Order 50, rule 1, applies and the motion is not improper. It may be that when an agreement to refer a matter to arbitration is made during the hearing or brought to the notice of the Court when the suit was at hearing or down for hearing, the Court may dispense with a formal motion; but when a case is standing over generally and the parties agree to refer the matter to arbitration, I see no objection to the matter being brought up on motion; indeed I think that is the correct course.