Madras High Court
Sohail Shamsudeen vs The Superintending Engineer on 21 September, 2021
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.09.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. CHANDRASEKHARAN
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
V.P.Shamsudeen (Deceased)
1.Sohail Shamsudeen
2.Aysha Shamsudeen
3.Nimitha Riyas
4.Nasiya Shihabudheen ... Revision Petitioners
Vs.
The Superintending Engineer, PWD/WRO
Water Resources Organisation,
Parambikulam-Aliyar Basin Circle,
Pollachi,
Coimbatore District PIN – 642 003 ... Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 23.07.2019 in E.P.No.71 of
2016, on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar
For Respondent : Dr.S.Suriya
Government Advocate (C.S.)
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 1 of 6
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed in
E.P.No.71 of 2016 on the file of the V Additional District Court, Coimbatore,
passed on 23.07.2019.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, in the Arbitration
proceedings initiated by the father of the petitioners, V.P.Shamsudeen, as
Proprietor of M/s.S&S Co. Contractors, the respondent contested the matter.
During the pendency of the Arbitration proceedings, V.P.Shamsudeen died.
His legal heirs were permitted to continue with the Arbitration proceedings.
At the conclusion of the Arbitration proceedings, a sum of Rs.1,09,84,027/-
was awarded. Then the petitioners filed E.P.No.71 of 2016. The respondent
entered appearance in the Execution Petition and submitted that the
respondent filed A.O.P.No.276 of 2015 on the file of the Principal District
Court, Coimbatore, challenging the award passed against the respondent.
Therefore, the learned V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, closed
E.P.No.71 of 2016 for the time being, pending the adjudication of the
aforesaid A.O.P. and liberty was given to file fresh Execution Petition after
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 2 of 6
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
disposal of A.O.P.No.276 of 2015. Against this order, the petitioners
preferred this Civil Revision Petition.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that A.O.P.No.276
of 2015 was filed against a dead person and therefore, it is not maintainable
in law. Strangely, the respondent filed Tr.O.P.No.22 of 2017 on the file of
the Principal District Court, Coimbatore, and in the said Tr.O.P., the
respondent has shown the legal heirs of the deceased V.P.Shamsudeen as
respondents. They deliberately omitted to show the legal heirs of the
deceased V.P.Shamsudeen as respondents in the appeal and filed the appeal
against a dead person. In such circumstances, the closure of the Execution
Petition is not correct. Therefore, he prayed for setting aside of the order of
the learned V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, and for restoring the
Execution Petition.
4.In response, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that,
already steps had been taken for impleading the legal representatives of the
deceased V.P.Shamsudeen. Therefore, the order closing the Execution
Petition cannot be challenged.
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 3 of 6
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
5.Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
6.A reading of the order in E.P.No.71 of 2016 shows that the learned
V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, referring to a judgment reported in
2016 2 MWN (Civil) 176 that, when a decree is challenged before the
Appellate Court, Executing Court cannot proceed with the execution
proceedings, closed the Execution Petition in E.P.No.71 of 2016 and has also
observed that A.O.P.No.276 of 2015 is pending for taking steps for
impleading the legal representatives. From this observation, it is clear that,
already steps had been taken for impleading the legal representatives of the
deceased V.P.Shamsudeen.
7.In this view of the matter, this Court does not want to interfere with
the order of the learned V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, however,
the Principal District Judge, Coimbatore, is directed to dispose of
A.O.P.No.276 of 2015 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 4 of 6
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
8.After dictating the order, the learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that, to his knowledge, no application was filed for impleading the
legal representatives of the deceased V.P.Shamsudeen. If this submission is
true, the learned Principal District Judge, Coimbatore, is directed to follow-
up the provisions under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996, in proceeding with the matter.
With these directions, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No
costs.
21.09.2021
mkn
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Nonspeaking order
To
1.The Principal District Judge,
Coimbatore.
2.The V Additional District Judge,
Coimbatore.
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 5 of 6
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
G. CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.
mkn
3.The Superintending Engineer, PWD/WRO
Water Resources Organisation,
Parambikulam-Aliyar Basin Circle,
Pollachi,
Coimbatore District - 642 003.
C.R.P. (NPD) No.3922 of 2019
21.09.2021
Page
http://www.judis.nic.in 6 of 6
