CLR/46/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 2292 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  CLR No.46 of 2022
                                  Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.

Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the revisionist.

2. Mr. B.D. Upadhyay, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sunil Upadhyay, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 4.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit this is the revision against the order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the Executing Court whereby the property of the revisionist has been directed to be attached for recovering the amount under Award.

4. He would submit that the revisionist is the wife of the owner of the offending vehicle against whom the Award was passed on 03.08.2016; that, before passing of the Award, the owner of the offending vehicle i.e. the husband of the revisionist had transferred the property in favour of his wife i.e. the revisionist herein by way of gift deed dated 16.09.2015, which has been directed to be attached by the impugned order.

5. He would further submit that in the execution proceedings before the Tribunal for realization of the Awarded amount against the owner of the offending vehicle/husband of the revisionist, the award holders i.e. the claimants moved the impleadment application to implead the revisionist, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 21.07.2017 with the observation that the owner had executed the gift deed in favour of the present revisionist i.e. his wife in order to defeat the execution of Award with connivance of revisionist.

6. He would further submit that the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional error and would refer to the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re "Shivshankar Gurgar vs. Dili" 2014( 2) SCC 465.

7. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1 to 4 would submit that the rigours of provisions of Order 21 of the C.P.C. would not apply with same force in the proceedings for realization of the Awarded amount by the Tribunal as the same applies in proceedings of decree of a Civil Court and the judgment cited by the counsel for the revisionist are in respect of civil proceedings and not in proceedings of Tribunal.

8. To this, learned counsel for the revisionist prays for and is granted three weeks time to place the law before the Court on the next date of hearing.

9. List on 13.09.2023.

10. Interim order dated 23.06.2022 is extended till the next date of listing.

(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) 17.08.2023 BS