This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 22.10.2007 passed in E.P. No.20 of 2005 on the file of III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereby and where under the learned Additional Chief Judge overruled the objections of the judgment-debtors and ordered further step with regard to sale of E.P. schedule property.

2. Background facts in a nutshell leading to filing of this civil revision petition by the judgment-debtors in E.P. No.20 of 2005 are:- This is second journey to the High Court by the judgment- debtors. The, respondent/decree-holder entered into an agreement with the Indian Railways for laying Peddapalli - Karimnagar new railway line. Certain disputes arose in respect of executing the work. Therefore, the decree holder invoked the arbitration clause and filed A.A. No.31 of 2001 seeking appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy, Advocate, came to be appointed as a sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes. The sole Arbitrator passed an award dated 6.2.2004. The decree-holder filed an application before the Arbitrator under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short, 'the Act'), seeking certain modifications in the award. A supplementary award dated 3.3.2004 came to be passed by the Arbitrator. The decree-holder submitted a representation dated 12.5.2004 to the Chief Administrative Officer (Construction), South Central Railway, Secunderabad, requesting for payment of the award amount. The Deputy Chief Engineer/Con.Plg/SC, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, informed the decree holder that the sole Arbitrator has rendered an award for Rs.16.00 lakhs towards cost of rock chiselling and Rs.2.00 lakhs towards overhead expenses without there being any proof and the South Central Railway is prepared to pay the amounts awarded by the Arbitrator on other items except the amount awarded under the above two items. For better appreciation, we may extract the text of the letter dated 30.6.2004 and it is thus:

"The award given by the Sole Arbitrator in the above subjected arbitration case along with supplementary award has been received by this office and is under consideration of the competent authority.

The Sole Arbitrator has rendered an award for Rs.16 lakhs towards "cost of rock chiselling" vide page 67 of item No.2 of the original award. There is no claim/dispute between Railways and you on this issue, yet the Arbitrator has given award for this claim. It has been requested by you in your application to the Sole Arbitrator (cited under reference 3 above) to omit this item.

Similarly, the Sole Arbitrator has rendered an award of Rs.2 lakhs towards overhead expenses for item No.3 of page 67 of original award and page 5 of the supplementary award. The sole Arbitrator while giving reasons towards this claim has mentioned that "hence they are discarded as not clinching evidence for proving expenditure on overhead charges claimed by the claimant contractor. In the absence of proof, claimant is not entitled for any sum towards overhead".

Since there is no dispute/claim for rock chiselling from either end and also since there is clear findings of the Arbitrator that in the absence of proof you are not entitled for any sum towards overhead, you are requested to give your unconditional "no claim certificate" foregoing the' awards towards the above two items (Rs.16 lakhs + Rs.2 lakhs + interest thereupon), so that the balance award can be considered for acceptance by competent authority.

An early reply is requested."

The decree-holder issued unconditional no claim certificate on 12.7.2004. Based on the said unconditional no claim certificate, an amount of Rs.6,69,053.92 Rs. came to be paid to the decree-holder by the South Central Railway. The decree-holder accepted the said amount. Thereafter, the decree-holder filed E.P. No.20 of 2005 for recovery of Rs.24,45,615/-. The judgment debtors filed counter resisting the exe