IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.01.2017 CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA
Civil Revision Petition (NPD) No.4083 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.20662 of 2016
1. Mr.S.Mohanavadivelan
2. Mr.K.Venkatesan
3. Mr.T.Rajendran ... Petitioners ..Vs..
Shriram Chits Funds Union Finance Limited, No.123, Angappan Naicken Street, Chennai - 600 001.
Rep.by its Authorized Representative Mr.D.Senthil Kumaran ... Respondent Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 24.10.2016 made in E.P.No.1751 of 2014 in A.C.P.(SUCF/EF) No.RK.375 of 2013 on the file of the IX Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.
For petitioner : Mr.K.Mohan O R D E R Challenging the impugned order passed on 24.10.2016 in E.P.No.1751 of 2014 for arbitration attachment in E.P. Application, the present revision petition has been filed.
2. At the time of admission, arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, are heard in length. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there was arbitration proceedings against the petitioners. But arbitration award has been passed, which has not been challenged, but they have not repaid the award amount. Hence the respondent herein has filed the E.P for attachment of the property.
3. After heard both sides, the Court below allowed the E.P., against which the present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would further submit that the petitioners wanted to settle the award amount. He further submitted that the amount actually to be paid as worked out in the E.P. is Rs.2,99,466/-, but the petitioners are ready to pay only Rs.2,18,345/-, being the amount awarded by the Arbitrator, which fact was not considered by the trial Court in proper perspective.
5. Considering the arguments and also the entire case papers and the petitioners being the subscribers having taken a chit as a successful bidder, at the time for payment of prize money, they have executed a loan agreement for payment of subsequent chit subscription. Since the petitioners were irregular in payment of instalments, the matter was placed before the Arbitrator who passed an ex-parte award on 30.08.2013. It is stated by the petitioners that since they have met with an accident, they have not appeared before the Arbitrator. Admittedly, it is not the case that after the award has been passed on 30.08.2013, they have filed any application to set aside the said ex-parte award dated 30.08.2013, which has been considered by the executing court in paragraph 8 of the order. The petitioners have not filed any application to set aside the ex-parte award, after filing the E.P.No.1751 of 2014 till the said E.P. was disposed of 24.10.2016. It is not their case to show that to prove their bona-fides, they have paid a part of the decree amount. These petitioners were filed to prevent the decree holder/respondent to enjoy the fruits of the decree. The order passed by the Executive Court does not warrant any interference with the impugned order.
6. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
05.01.2017 nvi To The IX Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
R.MALA,J., nvi CRP(NPD)No.4083 of 2016 05.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in