Void decree from invalid arbitration reference remains inexecutable; no claim certificate and contractual bar defeat arbitral jurisdiction.

A decree founded on an arbitral award was treated as a nullity where the contractor had already accepted final settlement, submitted a no claim certificate, and received refund of the security deposit before raising the disputes. On that admitted position, the contractual bar had already operated, so the disputes were not arbitrable under the arbitration clause. Because an award on an invalid reference is void ab initio, the resulting decree was also void and could not be executed. The objection to executability was therefore maintainable under Section 47, and principles of waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel could not validate the void decree.

---

---

Issues: Whether the decree sought to be executed was a nullity because the reference to arbitration was made in respect of disputes barred by the contract after the contractor had submitted the no claim certificate and obtained refund of the security deposit, and whether such decree could therefore be executed in proceedings under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The uncontroverted case was that the contractor had accepted the final settlement, submitted the no claim certificate, and received back the security deposit before raising the disputes. On that admitted position, the contractual bar had already operated and the disputes were not arbitrable under the arbitration clause. An award made on an invalid reference is a nullity, and a decree based on such an award is also a nullity. A decree that is void in law cannot be executed, and the objection to executability could be raised under Section 47. Principles of waiver, acquiescence, and estoppel could not validate a decree which was void ab initio.

Conclusion: The decree was held to be a nullity and inexecutable, and the Section 47 application was allowed.

---