1
PSS, J.
CRP.No.2407 of 2023
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2407 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner/Judgment debtor No.2 aggrieved by the order dated 13.07.2023 in E.P.No.674 of 2018 for implementation of the award passed in Arbitration Case No.69 of 2012 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-III Additional District Judge, Nalgonda.
2. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the Court below has no jurisdiction to execute the award dated 28.10.2013 on the ground that the disbursing officer and the revision petitioner/Judgment Debtor No.2 are residing and working in Hyderabad. Therefore, the salary attachment order dated 13.07.2023 is not binding on the petitioner/J.Dr No.2 as it was passed without following the procedure laid down under Order XXXIX Rule (4) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Court below failed to serve notice of EP on the revision petitioner/J.Dr No.2. Respondent/Claimant filed EP against J.Dr No.2 with a malafide intention and it was not ensured by the trial Court whether notice was issued to JDR No.2 or not before issuing the salary attachment. Therefore, he requested this Court to set aside the impugned order passed by the Court below. 2
PSS, J.
CRP.No.2407 of 2023
3. Arbitration Case No.69 of 2012 was filed by M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited (respondent/Decree Holder) and the Arbitrator vide order dated 28.10.2023 passed an amount of Rs.2,49,633/- in favour of the Chit Fund company and held that the claimant is entitled to recover the said amount along with interest. Basing on the said award, the respondent/D.Hr filed E.P.No.674 of 2018 seeking to attach the salary of the revision petitioner/J.Dr.No.2
4. The contention of the revision petitioner is that no notice was served upon him in E.P as well as in the award. The Ex.A7 is the office copy of notice-cum-Arbitration Notice dt.12.10.2011 issued by the claimant to the respondent. Ex.A8 is the acknowledgment received from respondent Nos.1 and 2 for the legal notice-cum-Arbitration notice dated 12.10.2011. Even in the award, it was mentioned that notices were sent by hand and registered post on 17.08.2013. So also in the EP, it was mentioned that notices were sent and they were given acknowledgment, as such, the contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted.
5. Petitioner herein is the 2nd respondent. He along with 3rd respondent gave surety to the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent failed to pay the amount and as such salary attachment was ordered against 2nd respondent. Therefore, this Court finds no 3 PSS, J.
CRP.No.2407 of 2023 reason to set aside the impugned order. The question of jurisdiction has to be raised at the earliest point of time before the arbitrator, but not in the EP proceedings. Therefore, the argument of the Revision Petitioner cannot be accepted.
6. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed confirming the order of the trial Court passed in E.P.No.674 of 2018 dated 13.07.2023. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand disposed of.
____________________________ JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA Dt:03.10.2023 Krl