Short Note : The plaintiffs-petitioners filed a suit for a declaration of their title over certain lands which they claimed to have succeeded on the death of Mst. Bindabai. The defence was that plaintiff No.1 through guardian father Rainu Rajobai (defendant No. 1), Samotibai and Indabai referred the dispute about land to arbitration of certain Panchas who gave their award and so long the award was not set aside the suit was not maintainable, in view of section 32 of the Indian Arbitration Act. The defendants further said that the lands originally belonged to Manihar, grandfather of Bindabai. On Bindabai's death, the claimants would be heirs of Manihar. Somotibai, Indabai and Asawati were, therefore, necessary parties. 2. The trial Court found that section 32 barred the suit in so far as plaintiff No. 1 was concerned since he was a party to the arbitration agreement through his lawful guardian and the award could be set aside only in the way provided in the Arbitration Act. But since plaintiffs 2 and 3 were not parties to the arbitration agreement, the suit was maintainable in so far as they were concerned. The Court, therefore, suggested that the plaintiff No. 1 could be transposed as one of the defendants. Held : No fault can be found with this part of the order. The effect of the award has yet to be examined and the relief which the plaintiff No.1 sought to obtain along with plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 might yet be available to him though arrayed as a defendant if the award is ultimately rendered ineffective by a declaration of title of the plaintiffs 2 and 3 in the suit. Revision dismissed.