JUDGMENT Harington, J. - In this appeal a preliminary objection is taken that no appeal lies. It appears that by a registered agreement the Plaintiff-Respondent and the Defendant (who is the Appellant before us) referred the matters in dispute in the suit between them to certain arbitrators. 2. The arbitrators made their award and the Defendant filed an application under sec. 525, C.P.C., that the award might be filed in Court. 3. The Plaintiff raised a number of objections to the filing of the award. These were considered in detail by the learned Sub-Judge who disposed of them adversely to the objector, and directed a decree to be drawn up in accordance with the award. 4. Against the decision of the Sub-Judge the objectors appealed to the District Judge. He held that no appeal lay. Hence the appeal to this Court. 5. In my opinion the District Judge is correct in his view. 6. The objector was unsuccessful in establishing any ground for a refusal to file the award under sec. 526. The award therefore then took effect as an award under the provisions of Chap. XXXVII of the C.P.C. 7. Under sec. 522, C.P.C., where the Court has seen no cause to remit the award, or where an application to set aside the award has been refused, the Court shall give judgment in accordance with the award and upon the judgment so given a decree shall follow. No appeal shall lie from such decree except in so far as the decree is in excess of or not in accordance with the award. 8. In the present case the Appellant in his objections to the Respondents filing the award asked that the award might be set aside; this was refused in the judgment in which the objections were disposed of and judgment given in accordance with the award. The decree then followed as provided by sec. 522 and that decree is final so far as it is in accordance with the award. 9. The present appeal is not founded on any ground which is left open as appealable under sec. 522. Therefore I agree with the learned District Judge that no appeal lies and consider that this appeal should be dismissed with costs. Geidt, J. 10. 522 and that decree is final so far as it is in accordance with the award. 9. The present appeal is not founded on any ground which is left open as appealable under sec. 522. Therefore I agree with the learned District Judge that no appeal lies and consider that this appeal should be dismissed with costs. Geidt, J. 10. I agree with my learned brother in thinking that in this case no appeal lay to the District Judge from the decree of the Subordinate Judge made in accordance with an award. 11. The present case is one of the class for which provision is made in sees. 525 and 526 of the Civil Procedure Code, namely, the class of cases where the agreement of reference is made and the arbitration takes place without the intervention of the Court and the assist ance of the Court is only sought in order to give effect to the award. When an application is made to a Court that an award made under these circumstances be filed in Court, two distinct questions may arise for determination:-(1) whether the conditions requisite for the making of such an application have been fulfilled, that is, whether any matter has been referred to arbitration by agreement of parties, and whether an award has been made thereon; (2) whether any of the grounds specified in sees. 520 and 521 of the Code exist in the case. 12. As the arbitration has been effected without the intervention of the Court, the former question, if it arises, can only be decided on evidence, and the decision is a decree of the Court within the meaning of the Code, as pointed out by the Privy Council in Ghulam Jilani v. Muhammad Ahmed 8 C.W.N. 226 (1901). As I understand the view of their Lordships in that case, an appeal lies from such a decree. This decree is entirely independent of and distinct from the decree based on the award which at a later stage may or may not follow, according as the decision on the second question is in the negative or in the affirmative. 13. It is only after the Court has decided that the conditions requisite for making an application under sec. This decree is entirely independent of and distinct from the decree based on the award which at a later stage may or may not follow, according as the decision on the second question is in the negative or in the affirmative. 13. It is only after the Court has decided that the conditions requisite for making an application under sec. 525 have been fulfilled, that any question under the second head referred to above can arise, and it seems clear that a decision on the second class of questions is not a decree, there is no such adjudication or any right claimed or defence set up as decides the suit. Therefore, under the luling of the Full Bench in Janokey Nath Guha v. Brojo Lal Guha 10 C.W.N. 609 (1906) no appeal lies from a decision on the question whether any of the ground mentioned in sec. 520 or 521 exist in the case, be that decision in the affirmative or in the negative. 14. If the decision on the last question be in the negative, that is, if it be decided that no ground, such as is mentioned or referred to in sec. 520 or sec. 521, exists, then the Court must order the award to be filed, and "such award shall then take effect as an award made under the provisions of Chap. XXXVII of the Code." Under sec. 522 a decree must follow based on the award, and the only ground of appeal that can be taken from a decree based on an award is that the decree is in excess of, or not in accordance with an award. This is a question that can arise only before the Appellate Court. 15. My view of the law then as interpreted by the rulings of the Privy Council and the Full Bench, to which I have referred is that the only questions that can be brought before an Appellate Court in proceedings under sees. 525 and 526 of the Code of Civil Procedure: (1) whether any matter has been referred to arbitration without the intervention of the Court, and an award made thereon, and (2) whether the decree ultimately made is in excess of, or not in accordance with the award. 525 and 526 of the Code of Civil Procedure: (1) whether any matter has been referred to arbitration without the intervention of the Court, and an award made thereon, and (2) whether the decree ultimately made is in excess of, or not in accordance with the award. In the present case before us no question of either kind was taken in the lower Appellate Court, and in my opinion the District Judge was quite right in dismissing the appeal as incompetent. I agree, therefore in dismissing this appeal with costs.