PRIVY COUNCIL

                   Firm Ramchand Manjimal and others

                   Vs.

Firm Goverdhandas Vishandas Ratanchand and others

                  P.C.A. Nos. 157, 158, 159, and 161 of 1919
(Viscount Cave, CJ, Lord Moulton, Sir John Edge and Mr. Ameer Ali. JJ)

                   17.2.1920

                   JUDGMENT

Viscount Cave CJ.

1. These are suits for alleged breaches of certain contracts for the sale of cotton. Each
contract contained an arbitration clause, and the defendants in each suit applied under
section 19 of the Indian Arbitration Act of 1899 for a stay of proceedings with a view
to the issues being referred to arbitration under the clause. The first Court granted a
stay, but on appeal the Judicial Commissioner of Sind reversed the orders and refused
a stay of proceedings. Applications were made to the Judicial Commissioner for
certificates under section 109 (a), or in the alternative under section 109 (c) of the
Civil Procedure Code of 1908, with a view to an appeal to this Board. The learned
Judges of the Judicial Commissioner's Court took the view that the orders refusing a
stay were final orders and accordingly, granted a certificate under section 110 to the
effect that the value of the matter in dispute exceeded Rs. 10,000. Thereupon the
appeals were brought to His Majesty in Council and the objection is raised that the
orders refusing a stay were in fact not final and, accordingly, that the appeals do not
lie.

2. Their Lordships have considered the matter and are of opinion that the preliminary
objection succeeds. The question as to what is a final order was considered by the
Court of Appeal in the case of Salaman v. Warner1 and that decision was followed by
the same Court in the case of Bozsch v. Altricham Urban District Council2. The effect
of those and other judgments is that an order is final if it finally disposes of the rights
of the parties. The orders now under appeal do not finally dispose of those rights, but
leave them to be determined by the Courts in the ordinary way.
3. In their Lordships' view, the orders wore not final, and accordingly the appeals
cannot proceed, and their Lordships will therefore humbly advise His Majesty that
they should be dismissed with costs.

4. Two of the appeals have already been withdrawn, as regards certain of the parties,
and therefore the order will not apply to those.

Appeals dismissed.

Cases Referred.

   1. [1891] 1 Q.B.734 : 39 W.R.547 : 60 L.J.Q.B.624
   2. [1903] I. K. B. 547 : 51 W.R.337 : 67 J. P.397 : 72 L.J.K.B.271 : 1 L.G.R. 639 :

       19 T.L.R.266.