Madras High Court
A.Ramanathan vs M/S.Shriram City Union Finance ... on 28 April, 2021
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 28.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
C.R.P.(MD).No.743 of 2021
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4033 of 2021
1.A.Ramanathan
2.R.Lakshmi : Petitioners/ Respondents/Judgment Debtors
Vs.
M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Limited,
Rep.by its Legal Manager & Power of
Attorney Holder,
K.Srisubramanian.
: Respondent/Respondent/Decree Holder
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 227 of
Constitution of India, to call for the records of the petition in E.P.No.56 of
2020 in A.C.P.TF.No.81 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District Judge,
Ramanathapuram and to struck down the same and allow this Civil Revision
Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
ORDER
The revision petition has been filed to struck off the petition in E.P.No.
56 of 2020 in A.C.P.TF.No.81 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District
Court, Ramanathapuram.
2.The respondent/decree holder has laid the Execution Petition in
E.P.No.56 of 2020 against the revision petitioner / judgment debtor for
executing the arbitral award passed in A.C.P.TF.No.81 of 2019, dated
31.12.2019 by the sole Arbitrator.
3.It is evident from the records that all the respondents before the
Arbitrator, including the revision petitioner had remained ex-parte, that the
Arbitrator after conducting enquiry, has passed the award on 31.12.2019,
directing the Judgment Debtors to pay Rs.8,90,076/- with interest and costs
and that the decree holder has laid the execution of the said award by
attachment and sale of the petition mentioned property.
4.The case of the revision petitioner is that the respondent along with
one Karthikeyan, fraudulently obtained the mortgage deed and on that basis
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
arbitration proceedings were initiated and got the award and hence, they were
forced to file a suit to declare that the mortgage deed dated 19.09.2018
executed by the revision petitioner in favour of the respondent is null and void
and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant therein from in any
manner trespassing or interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment
of the suit property.
5.The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that
though the suit challenging the mortgage deed is pending before the competent
Civil Court, the respondent is not entitled to file the execution petition, that the
respondent has only to file the necessary application in the civil suit in
O.S.No.220 of 2019, if any relief is required and that since the alleged loan
transaction itself is fraudulent one, the present execution petition is legally not
sustainable.
6.At the outset, this Court is constrained to say that the above action of
the revision petitioners would only amount to abuse of process of the Court.
Admittedly, the revision petitioners had remained ex-parte in the arbitration
proceedings. More over, they have admitted the receipt by the Court notice in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
E.P.No. 56 of 2020 and hence, it is for them to appear before the Executing
Court and to put forth their defence, if any.
7.It is not the case of the revision petitioners that they have taken any
steps for setting aside the ex-parte award passed by the Arbitrator. The revision
petitioners by simply alleging that the transaction was fraudulent and filed the
suit challenging the same, they cannot stall the execution proceedings. In case,
if the alleged loan transaction is fraudulent one and the mortgage deed is null
and void, it is for them to challenge before the proper forum and certainly, they
have no locus standi to question the very filing of the execution petition itself.
Hence, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the very filing of the revision
petition is legally unsustainable and consequently, this Court is not inclined to
admit the revision petition.
8. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
28.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
das
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
Note:
In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order
may be utilized for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Principal District Judge,
Ramanathapuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(MD)No.743 of 2021
K.MURALI SHANKAR, J.
das
C.R.P.(MD).No.743 of 2021
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4033 of 2021
28.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
