Madras High Court
V.C. Sethu vs Inderchand Kochar on 24 August, 2021
CRP ((PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No13474 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
CRP (PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No. 13474 of 2021
V.C. Sethu ...Petitioner
versus
Inderchand Kochar ... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India to admit and allow this Civil Revision Petition by set aside the
order and decreetal order dated 11.08.2021 made in E.P.No.3314 of 2014
in Arbitration Case No.ARB/IK/M/09 of 2013 on the file of X Assistant
Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr. Ravindran,
Senior Advocate
for Mr.K.Sellathurai
ORDER
Heard Mr.Ravindran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP ((PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No13474 of 2021
2. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 11.08.2021, passed
by the X Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai in E.P. No.3314 of 2014.
3. Under the impugned order, the property of the petitioner /
judgment debtor was directed to be attached in an Execution Petition
filed by the respondent / decree holder to execute an arbitral award dated
30.10.2013 passed in Arbitration case No.ARB/IK/M/09 of 2013.
4. The case of the petitioner / judgment debtor is that he has not
received notice in the Arbitration case initiated by the respondent /
decree holder. A counter was filed by the petitioner /judgment debtor in
the execution petition.
5. The Executing Court rejected the contention of the petitioner on
the ground that the petitioner / judgment debtor ought to have challenged
the Arbitral award dated 30.10.2013 by filing an application under
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Instead of
challenging the Arbitral award, the petitioner has raised dispute in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP ((PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No13474 of 2021
execution proceedings, which the Executing Court has rightly rejected.
If the petitioner had not received the notice in the Arbitral proceedings
initiated by the respondent / decree holder, he has a good ground for
challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Instead of adopting the settled challenge procedure available to a person
against whom an Arbitral award has been passed, the petitioner has filed
a counter before the Execution proceedings disputing the Arbitral award
and claiming that he had received only a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- by way of
loan from the respondent / decree holder and that the Arbitral award for
a sum of Rs.14,60,000/- ought not to have passed against him.
6. The purpose of arbitration is for expeditious disposal of
disputes. If this Civil Revision Petition is entertained under Article 227
of the Constitution of India, the purpose of Arbitration as contemplated
under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 will be defeated. The
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a special enactment which
provides for a challenge procedure as against arbitral awards. It has
inbuilt safeguards to redress the grievances of the petitioner as claimed in
this revision. Insofar as the grounds raised in this Civil Revision Petition
are concerned, without taking recourse to the challenge procedure under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP ((PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No13474 of 2021
the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the petitioner has
chosen to defend the Execution Petition initiated by the respondent /
decree holder to execute the Arbitral award passed in his favour against
the petitioner. The Executing Court has rightly rejected the contention
of the petitioner / judgment debtor on the ground that he ought to have
challenged the Arbitral award, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, which he has failed to do so.
7. This Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the
executing Court and therefore, there is no merit in this Civil Revision
petition. Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition stands dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.08.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
vsi2
To
The X Assistant Judge,
City Civil Court,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP ((PD) No.1734 of 2021
and
CMP No13474 of 2021
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
vsi2
CRP (PD) No.1734 of 2021
in
CMP No. 13474 of 2021
24.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
