M/ S. Ashok Kumar Rakesh Kumar vs A.P. Foods
2022 Latest Caselaw 97 Tel

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                               AND
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                              C.R.P.No.7291 of 2018
ORDER:   (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)




     The present Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by

the orders dt.16-11-2018 passed in C.E.P.No.25 of 2017 in

E.P.No.59 of 2010 of the Commercial Court-cum-XXIV

Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hydeabad.


     2. It has been contended by the petitioner that he is a

judgment debtor and the respondent-decree holder has filed

C.E.P.No.25 of 2017 in E.P.No.59 of 2010 against the

petitioner for execution of Arbitral Award dt.23-05-2001

passed by the Arbitrator. The petitioner had contended that

he is not having any means to pay the amount as adjudicated

by the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator has passed an ex parte

award on 23-05-2001 and the petitioner has filed

O.P.No.1282 of 2002 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996 and the said O.P. was dismissed by

XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, vide

orders dt.08-02-2005.

3. The petitioner had further contended that the Court

below has erroneously come to a conclusion that the

petitioner is a partner of three firms viz., M/s. India Wire and

Allied Products, M/s. Hyderabad Plastics and M/s. Balaji

Shivanarayan and Company. The Arbitrator based upon an

erroneous finding that the petitioner is a partner of those

three firms passed an Arbitral Award dt.23-05-2001. Later,

the respondent/decree holder filed C.E.P.No.25 of 2017 in

E.P.No.59 of 2010 and the same was allowed by orders

dt.16-11-2018 with a direction that the petitioner be arrested

by issuing arrest warrant under Order XXI Rule 34 CPC.

Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is

filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended

that the petitioner has no means to honour the arbitral award

passed by the Court below. This Court was pleased to grant

interim suspension vide orders dt.23-08-2019.

5. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, this

Court has specifically asked as to how much time the

petitioner would take to comply with the Arbitral Award

dt.23-05-2001. In reply thereto, learned counsel for the

petitioner has expressed that the petitioner is not in a

position to honour the Arbitral Award.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent has contended

that the award passed by the Arbitrator dt.23-05-2001 has

become final and the O.P. preferred by the petitioner against

the Arbitral Award i.e. O.P.No.1282 of 2002 was also

dismissed confirming the Arbitral Award. The petitioner has

exhausted all the remedies available against the said Arbitral

Award and the Arbitral Award has become final. Therefore

there are no merits in the Civil Revision Petition and the same

is liable to be dismissed.

8. Having considered the rival submissions made by

the counsel appearing for both sides, this Court is of the

considered view that the Arbitral Award dt.23-05-2001 has

become final and the petitioner has unsuccessfully exhausted

all the remedies available to him.

9. Moreover, when a question is posed by this Court as

to how much time is required to comply with the arbitral

award, no attempt is being made by the petitioner to honour

the Arbitral Award. Hence, this Court is not inclined to

interfere with the impugned orders passed in C.E.P.No.25 of

2017 in E.P.No.59 of 2010 which were passed in order to

execute the Arbitral Award dt.23-05-2001 which has become

final and it is liable to be executed against the petitioner.

However, as a last chance, the petitioner is given six more

months' time from today to comply with the Arbitral Award,

failing which, the orders dt.16-11-2018 passed in C.E.P.No.25

of 2017 in E.P.No.59 of 2010 passed by the Commercial

Court-cum-XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,

Hyderabad, stands revived.

10. With these observations, the Civil Revision Petition

is disposed of. No costs.

11. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

stand closed.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 07.01.2022 kvr