Supreme Court of India
Balwant Singh (D) Thr. L.Rs. vs Dungar Singh (Dead) Through Lrs. on 12 February, 2020Author: R. Banumathi

Bench: R. Banumathi, S. Abdul Nazeer, A.S. Bopanna






DUNGAR SINGH (D) THR. LRS. …Respondents



This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the final

order and judgment dated 01.06.2006 passed by the High Court of

Rajasthan at Jodhpur in SB Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.180 of

1989 in and by which the High Court allowed the appeal of the

respondents and made the arbitral award between the parties the

rule of the court.

2. Balwant Singh and Dungar Singh are real brothers. After the

death of their father-Jeet Mal Jain, disputes arose between them

Signature Not Verified regarding partition of family properties. The parties decided to settle
Digitally signed by
Date: 2020.02.12
16:49:55 IST
Reason: their dispute amicably through arbitration proceedings. Vide

agreement dated 23.11.1981, they have appointed Shri Fateh Lal,

Kiran Mal and Sensh Mal as arbitrators for partitioning immovable

properties, shares and jewellery. These arbitrators were also close

relatives of the parties. The arbitrators Shesh Mal Pagaria is

brother-in-law of Dungar Singh, Shri Kiranmal Swansukha is co-

brother of Balwant Singh and Fateh Lal Hingad is a close relative of

the parties. The arbitrators passed award dated 23.11.1981

mentioning therein that the decision given unanimously by the three

of them will be binding on both the parties. By this award, the

arbitrators had given the following decisions:-

 “In the house situated at Babelon Ki Sehri, except for the one
house which is on the left side of the pole and is known as
Popat Wala House, all other houses will belong to Shri Dungar
Singh Ji Babel.

 After giving the benefit of all the houses to Dungar Singh Ji,
plot admeasuring 80× 40 situated in Mehtaji Ki Badi and Papat
Wala House and plot located in Babelon Ki Sehri will remain
with Shri Balwant Singh Ji. Whole agricultural land will remain
with Shri Dungar Singh Ji and Shri Dungar Singh Ji will give
Rs.9,000/- to Balwant Singh Ji.

 According to the list of jewellery placed in bank locker, “Baju”
will remain with Shri Dungar Singh Ji and “Kangania” – (two)
will remain with Shri Balwant Singh Ji. The remaining gold
and silver jewellery will be given to both of them in equal parts.

 Capital that has been received from the shop by Shri Jeetmal
Ji and his wife by Notice Munju dated 13.06.1973 comes to a
total amount of Rs.20,381/- + Rs.4281.17 = Rs.2466.17
(Rupees Twenty Four Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Eight and

Paise Seventeen Only) and from that both will get fifty – fifty
share and accordingly Shri Dungar Singh Ji will give
Rs.12,334/- (Twelve Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Four
Only) to Balwant Singh Ji.

 Both will get equal share of the share certificates that are in
the name of Shri Jeetmal Ji Babel.

 Utensils that are given in the list will be distributed equally
between them.

 In the above decision, demands made by both of you and
whatever is possessed by each of you is maintained on as is
where is basis. And this decision is taken that all other
demands are over. Meaning both of them has nothing to do
with each other.”

On 10.12.1982, Collector (Stamps), Udaipur registered the award.

3. On 07.04.1983, Dungar Singh filed an application before the

District Judge to make the award rule of the court. Along with the

application, acceptance of both the parties and award given by the

arbitrators were also presented. Appellant Balwant Singh raised

objection assailing the award. The court called for evidence of both

the parties. The application for making the award rule of the court

was dismissed by the District Judge, Udaipur. The District Judge

held that the panch had conducted the whole proceedings in their

own way and such an award cannot be considered valid in law. The

court noted that on examining the award, it was found that the

award was written on 23.11.1981 and the respondent Dungar Singh

had signed the award after a long time on 26.07.1982. The court

also noted that on 26.07.1982 itself, one panch Sheshmal Pagaria

produced the award before the arbitration judge where stamp

deficiency was removed and on the very same day i.e. 26.07.1982,

the same was produced before the Deputy Registrar, Udaipur for

registration. It was observed that it is not clarified as to where was

the original award from 23.11.1981 to 26.07.1982. The District

Judge further held that though allegations of misconduct by any

panch was not established but it was found that the three panchas

completed the proceedings quite hurriedly and probably have not

given enough time to Balwant Singh to put forth his side. The court

therefore observed that making the award rule of the court does not

appear to be safe and justifiable because the award by the panch is

not fully clear on the basis of which the dispute between the parties

could be finally settled.

4. Aggrieved, the respondents filed appeal before the High Court

under Section 39(1)(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The High Court

by impugned judgment dated 01.06.2006 opined that on going

through the award, it is seen that the award was given unanimously

by the arbitrators. The High Court further held that no misconduct

was found on the part of the arbitrators and the award is based on

the materials supplied by the parties and after due deliberation and

discussion. The High Court held that the arbitrators are the close

relatives of the parties and one of the arbitrators Shri Kiran Mal is

the brother-in-law of Balwant Singh and as per Ex.-7, the arbitrators

were appointed by mutual consent. Pointing out that mere passing

of the award on the same day in one sitting does not give rise to

any suspicion and would not raise any doubt or ambiguity and that

no misconduct has been alleged against the arbitrators, the High

Court set aside the order of the learned District Judge and

concluded that the award deserves to be made rule of the court and

accordingly, declared to be so. Being aggrieved, the appellant has

preferred this appeal.

5. We have heard Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, learned Senior

counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Puneet Jain, learned

counsel appearing for the respondents and also perused the

impugned judgment and materials on record.

6. It can be seen from the terms of reference dated 23.11.1981

that the parties had agreed that the arbitral award would be passed

unanimously by the arbitrators and the same would bind the parties.

As pointed out by the High Court, the parties had by mutual consent

agreed to the appointment of all the three arbitrators and they had

submitted their respective claims before the arbitrators. As pointed

out earlier, the arbitrators are the close relatives of the parties and

no misconduct is alleged against the arbitrators. They have also

filed the will made by their father Jeetmal Singh before the

arbitrators. Both the parties were present and gave their consent in

writing. That apart, the parties have also submitted their respective

claims in the properties and the arbitrators after hearing the parties,

passed the award. Having regard to the fact that the parties have

consented for the arbitrators to consider their claims and pass the

award, the High Court rightly set aside the order of the District

Judge holding that the award has been passed after due


7. With a view to further amicably settle the matter, the parties

have negotiated and agreed that on Item No.8-Jewellery, in lieu of

50% of the jewellery which the LRs of Dungar Singh are entitled i.e.

40 tolas, LRs of Balwant Singh shall pay the amount of

Rs.10,00,000/- to the LRs of Dungar Singh within a period of nine

months. The parties have further agreed that insofar as the land

falling in Khasra No.15/1Ka which has been sold by Balwant Singh

which is the subject matter of litigation against the third party, LRs of

Dungar Singh shall continue the litigation with the third party.

8. In view of further settlement arrived at between the parties,

with the consent of the parties, the award shall stand modified as


Description of Properties involved in the Arbitration Award and stand of the

Sl. Description of Assigned to as Party in Possession
No. Property per the Award Who is in Stand of the parties
1. House at Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh
Babelon Ki Sehri continue to remain in
possession of the house.2. Popat Wala Balwant Singh LRs of Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh are
House, Old ready to hand over
possession of the said
Possession of house
shall be handed over on
or before 31.05.2020.
3. Remaining Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh
House continue to remain in

4. Plot ad Rs.9,000/- Balwant Singh In view of the
measuring 80*40 payable by LRs compromise, payment
situated in of Dungar of amount of
Mehtaji ki Badi Singh to LRs of Rs.10,00,000/- by LRs of
Balwant Singh Balwant Singh qua Item
No.8 – Jewellery to be
paid to LRs of Dungar
Singh within a period of
nine months. The
amount of Rs.9,000/- is
not payable by LRs of
Dungar Singh to LRs of
Balwant Singh.
5. Agriculture Land Dungar Singh The said agriculture Land falling in Khasra
land falls in Khasra No.15/1Ka has been sold
No.15/1Ka and 13/3,
by Balwant Singh
Vallabh Nagar,
Udaipur. regarding which litigation
is pending against third
Land falling in Khasra
No.15/1Ka has been party.
sold by Balwant LRs of Dungar Singh are
Singh. at liberty to continue the
litigation with the third
party at their cost.
6. Money from Shop To be split Amount payable In view of the amount of
Owned by Late equally Rs.12,334/- by LRs Rs.10,00,000/- agreed to
Shri Jeetmal and of Dungar Singh to be paid by LRs of
Wife LRs of Balwant Balwant Singh qua item

(20,381+4281.17 Singh. No.8 – Jewellery, this
=24668.17) amount of Rs.12,334/- is
not payable by the LRs
of Dungar Singh.

Sl. Description of Assigned to as Party in Possession
No. Property per the Award Who is in Stand of the parties
7. Share certificate To be split LRs of Dungar Singh LRs of Dungar Singh are
in the name of equally ready to equally divide
Jeetmal Ji Babel
the shares amongst
themselves and LRs of
Balwant Singh.
Shares shall be divided
within a period of three
8. Jewellery:
i. Baju LRs of Balwant Singh The said jewelleries are
Dungar Singh
ii. Kangan*2
said to have been taken
iii.Remaining Dungar Singh
gold and silver or withdrawn by Balwant
To be distributed Singh from Bank Locker
in equal share
of Bank of Rajasthan on
Weight of the said
jewelleries is 80 tolas
(800 gms) and the LRs of
Dungar Singh are entitled
to 50% i.e. 40 tolas of the
In lieu of 50% of the
jewellery, LRs of
Balwant Singh agreed
to pay an amount of
Rs.10,00,000/- to LRs of
Dungar Singh. Amount
of Rs.10,00,000/- is
payable within a period
of nine months.

9. LRs of Balwant Singh – Deepak B Jain s/o Balwant Singh has

filed an affidavit stating that the appellant shall pay an amount of

Rs.10,00,000/- within a period of nine months in lieu of the share of

gold of Lrs. of Dungar Singh in full and final settlement. Mr. Deepak

B Jain, LRs of Dungar Singh has also filed an affidavit that in lieu of

jewellery of 40 tolas, they are ready to receive Rs.10,00,000/-. In

case, if the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- is not paid within a period of

nine months, the appellant is liable to pay an interest at the rate of

9% per annum on the said amount of Rs.10,00,000/-.

10. In terms of the above modified award as stated in Para No.

(8), the appeal shall stand disposed. Registry is directed to draft the

decree accordingly. The chart in Para No.(8) shall form part of the




New Delhi;
February 12, 2020.



Leave a Reply

Sign In


Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.