Madras High Court
Gurunathan ... Revision vs M/S.Sri Ram City Union Finance ... on 17 July, 2023
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 17.07.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.11637 of 2017
Gurunathan ... Revision Petitioner/3rd respondent/
Judgment Debtor / 4th Respondent
Vs.
1.M/s.Sri Ram City Union Finance Company Ltd.,
Coimbatore Region, Karur Branch,
189, 190 Second floor,
Jawahar Bazaar, KPM Textiles upstairs,
Karur District.
Through its representative Branch Manager,
K.Thangaraj ... 1st Respondent/ Petitioner /
Decree holder/ Petitioner
2.N.Karthikeyani
3.A.Mahadevan ... Respondents 2&3/Respondents 2&3/
Judgment debtors / Respondents 2 & 3
4.The Medical Officer,
Government Primary Health Centre,
Sengal Post, Karur District.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
5.The Assistant Engineer,
Tamilnadu Electricity Board,
O&M Rural, Manaparai,
Trichy District.
6.The Block Medical Officer,
Government Primary Health Centre,
Kannivadai, Dindigul District. ... Respondents 4 to 6/ Garnishees
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, against the fair and decretal order, dated 16.09.2016, in E.P.No.60
of 2014, in Arbitration Case No.71 of 2011 on the file of the Principal Sub
Court, Karur and to set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sasikumar
For Respondents : Mr.J.Bharathan for R1
: Mr.Senthil Ayyanar for R4, 5 &6
: No appearance for R2 & R3
ORDER
The instant Civil Revision Petition has been filed, against the
order, dated 16.09.2016, in E.P.No.60 of 2014, in Arbitration Case No.71 of
2011 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Karur and to set aside the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
2. The revision petitioner herein is the wife and the respondent
herein is the husband.
3. Short facts which give rise to the instant Revision Petition, are
that one Mr.Gurunathan, S/o. Thangavelu was the respondent – co-
borrower in Arbitration Proceedings SCUF AC.No.71/2011. Wherein, the
sole Arbitrator has passed an award on 23.09.2011, directing the
respondents therein, including one Mr.Gurunathan, S/o. Thangavelu, to pay
a sum of Rs.3,42,372/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Three
Hundred and Seventy Two only) along with interest, costs and legal
expenses.
3.2. Based upon the said award, the first respondent herein, has
filed an execution Petition seeking for garnishee's order, attaching the
salaries of the respondents 2 to 4/ co-borrowers. Wherein, the revision
petitioner herein has filed a counter statement before the executing Court,
stating that he is not the third respondent, however, notice has been served
upon him. It is also the submission of the revision petitioner herein, that his
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
father's name is Thembadi and the alleged third respondent's father's name
in the petition is Thangavelu and the address of the revision petitioner is
different, from that of the address mentioned in the revision petitioner.
Therefore, it is his submission that he is not at all the third respondent in
the execution petition. However, since he has been working under the
Health Department, because of the Garnishee order, the superiors are
attaching his salary, so as to satisfy the award.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the contesting respondent –
first respondent would submit that they filed the execution petition only
against one Mr.Gurunathan, S/o. Thangavelu and what they want, is
attachment against one Mr.Gurunathan S/o. Thangavelu Wherein, his
address is mentioned as O.No.1/159, N.No.1/88, Karunanithi Nagar, 6th
Street, Dindigul -624 001.
5. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that the very objection
raised by the petitioner is unwarranted. However, considering the peculiar
circumstances of the case that he has been directed by the superior to pay
the amount, liberty may be given to the revision petitioner herein to file an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
appropriate application before the Executing Court, so as to prove that he is
not the third respondent as found in the petition.
6. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of,
with the above observation. There shall be no order as to cost.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
NCC : Yes/No 17.07.2023
Index :Yes/No
Ls
To
1.The Principal Sub Court,
Karur.
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2457 of 2017
C.KUMARAPPAN.,J.
Ls
C.R.P(MD)No.2457 of 2017
17.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
