Telangana High Court
Megavath Keshya, vs Kapil Chits Hyderabad Pvt.Ltd., on 3 January, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3536 of 2024
O R D E R:
This revision petition is filed by the petitioners, aggrieved
by the orders passed by the learned Additional Junior Civil
Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class Spl.(MOBILE),
Kamareddy (herein after referred to as "trial Court") in E.A.No.5
of 2024 in E.P.No.19 of 2020, dated 11.03.2024, invoking the
provisions under Section 115 of CPC.
2. Heard Sri U.Chandrasekhar, learned counsel for
petitioners and Sri K.P.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for
respondent No.1.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have filed two applications in E.P.No.19 of 2020
i.e., E.A.Nos.3 and 5 of 2024. E.A.No.3 of 2024 seeking to set
aside the default order dated 24.01.2024, setting petitioner
No.3 herein as ex-parte and forfeiting the right of filing
counter of petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 herein and E.A.No.5 of
2024 is filed seeking stay of further proceedings in E.P.No.19
of 2020. He further submits that the trial Court allowed
E.A.No.3 of 2024 on 12.02.2024, on the other hand,
dismissed E.A.No.5 of 2024 on 11.03.2024, without giving
any reasons and the same is contrary to law. He also submits
that the petitioners are guarantors and respondent No.1 is
not taking any steps against principal borrower. Hence the
trial Court ought to have grant stay in E.A.No.5 of 2024.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1,
submits that the learned Arbitrator after following the due
procedure as contemplated under law passed award in
Arbitration Case No.69 of 2017 on 15.11.2018 and the same
has become final. Respondent No.1 filed E.P.No.19 of 2020 in
the month of February, 2020 and inspite of several
opportunities given to the petitioners, they have not chosen to
file counter and the trial Court had passed order dated
24.01.2024, forfeiting the right of filing counter of the
petitioners. Thereafter, pursuant to the application filed by
the petitioners i.e., E.A.No.3 of 2024, the trial Court allowed
the application, directing the petitioners to file counter.
Insofar as E.A.No.5 of 2024 is concerned, Arbitrator passed
award against the petitioners jointly and severally and the
same is binding upon the petitioners and the trial Court
rightly dismissed the said application.
5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the
respective parties and after perusal of the material available
on record, it reveals that the petitioners who are judgment
debtor Nos.2 to 5 in E.P.No.19 of 2020 filed two applications
i.e., E.A.Nos.3 and 5 of 2024, seeking to set aside default
order dated 24.01.2024 and for grant of stay of further
proceedings in E.P.No.19 of 2020.
6. It is pertinent to mention that neither the petitioners
nor respondent Nos.1 and 2 have questioned the award
passed by Arbitrator on 15.11.2018. However, to render
substantial justice to the parties, the impugned order passed
by the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial
Magistrate of First Class Spl.(MOBILE), Kamareddy in E.A.No.5
of 2024 in E.P.No.19 of 2020, dated 11.03.2024 is set aside and
the application is allowed subject to condition that the
petitioners shall deposit 50% of the decreeted amount,
pursuant to the award in Arbitration Case No.69 of 2017 and
on such deposit, respondent No.1 is entitled to withdraw the
same without furnishing security and the trial Court is
directed to dispose of E.P.No.19 of 2020, after giving
opportunity to both the parties in accordance with law, within
a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order.
7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
No costs.
Miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
______________________
J.SREENIVAS RAO, J
Date: 03.01.2025
vsl
