Order Plaintiff is the appellant in this miscellaneous appeal which arises out of the judgment and decree dated 16.8.90, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Patna in Title Suit no. 181 of 1988, whereby the court below has made the award, the rule of the Court, The plaintiff filed a suit for damages against non compliance of the terms of agreement. During the pendency of the suit, the entire dispute was referred to the arbitrator for adjudication of the claim of the respective parties. In terms of the arbitration Clause, the Food Commissioner was appointed as arbitrator. After hearing the parties, the said arbitrator has submitted an award before the court, where the suit was pending. The plaintiff-appellant filed an objection in terms of Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act and the Court after taking into consideration the relevant materials and after hearing the parties, rejected the objection filed by the parties and made the award rule of the court, which is under challenge in this appeal. 2. Mr. Asgar Hussain, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the award given by the arbitrator is a non speaking award, inasmuch as, the arbitrator has not considered the case of the respective parties and the materials available on the record and as such the learned court below has committed an illegality in making the award rule of the Court. He has also assailed the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the court while passing the impugned judgment has not considered the relevant materials and accordingly non suited the plaintiff without any basis whatsoever. That apart Mr. Hussain has also argued the case on merit and submits that if the award is accepted as it is the appellant will suffer a huge loss. 3. Mr. Tarkeshwar Dayal, in opposition has however supported the judgment of the trial court and submits that the court has rightly made the award the rule of the court as according to him, the arbitrator after hearing the parties and taking into consideration all relevant materials on record has given the impugned award. 4. In order to appreciate the rival contention of the parties, I have perused the judgment of the trial court and also the award filed by the arbitrator. 4. In order to appreciate the rival contention of the parties, I have perused the judgment of the trial court and also the award filed by the arbitrator. The arbitrator, no doubt, has not mentioned, the documents and the reasons in details, yet he has considered the relevant aspect of the matter and passed the award. It is well settled principle of law that the trial court has a limited jurisdiction in such matter and the award can only be challenged on the ground as mentioned under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act. It is not upon for the trial court to re-appraise the evidence and come to a different finding than what has been found by the arbitrator. 5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the materials on the record including the judgment under challenge in this appeal, I do not find any illegality in the same and accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, but without cost. 6. Mr. Hussain, however submits that by virtue of the impugned order/judgment, the plaintiff will suffer a let and, as such, he seeks permission to file a separate suit for redressal of his grievance with respect to the properties which were not the subject matter of the arbitration proceeding. At this stage, I cannot express any opinion on the merit of the submissions. However, the plaintiff if so advised, may file a suit if permissible in law.