The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966, particularly Section 31, and the relevant rules of the CPC, Order 21 Rules 43 and 64, in the context of transmission of a decree.

C.V. Karthikeyan, J.

1. This application has been under Order 14 Rule 2 of the Original Side Rules, seeking to set aside the order of the Master, dated 6.12.2017 made in EPD.No.38028 of 2017 and to direct the Registry to number the execution petition in EPD.No.38028 of 2017 and transmit the decree/award, dated 25.4.2016 passed by the Sole Arbitrator to the District Court, Bellary, State of Karnataka.

2. EPD.No.38028 of 2017 had been filed by a decree holder pursuant to the final award passed under Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966.

3. The decree holder, M/s.P & D Enterprises, represented by its Proprietor M.Poobalan and the judgement debtor, M/s.Tiffins Barytes Asbestors and Paints Limited, represented by its Managing Director, Sriram Vedham, were parties before the arbitration proceedings conducted by the Sole Arbitrator, K.Venkatraman, J., former Judge of the Madras High Court. The Arbitral Tribunal came to be constituted by orders passed by this Court in OP.No.541 of 2014, dated 19.9.2014.

4. The Arbitral Tribunal had issued notices to both parties and during the arbitral proceedings, both the parties had filed a Memo of Compromise, dated 24.4.2016. On that date, a Memorandum of Understanding, dated 16.4.2016 was also filed. According to the said Memorandum of Understanding, the following agreement was reached between the parties:-

(a). As per the said Memorandum of Understanding the Respondent shall pay to the claimant a sum of Rs.20,93,52,531.00/- (Rupees twenty crores ninety three lakhs fifty two thousand and five hundred and thirty one only) along with interest @ 18% at the bank mode of calculation from the date of receipt of advance.

(b). The Respondent also has to pay the claimant liquidated damages of Rs.15,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen crores only) in full quit and settlement of all claims under the subject agreement.

(c). The parties are also agreed for passing consent award in respect of other matters which were set out in Class 3 to 6 of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between them.

(d). The parties also agreed now the litigations pending between them in various courts shall be disposed off as set out in Class 7 of the Memorandum of Understanding.”

5. In pursuant to the said Memorandum of Understanding followed by a Memo of Compromise filed before the Arbitral Tribunal, the Sole Arbitrator had passed an award on 25.4.2016, incorporating the above terms in his award. To enforce the award, the decree holder had filed a execution petition under Order 21 Rules 43 and 64 of CPC before the Original Side of this Court and sought the following assistance of the Court:-

(a). to pass an order of attachment of approximately 7.5 lakhs metric tons of iron ore lying in S.No.311, M.L.No.2293, Haraganadoni Village, Bellary Taluk, Bellary District, State of Karnataka, as per the records of DMG and IBM. Schedule of the Mines M.L.No.2293, where the stock is present is bounded on the:

North By : S.Nos.74,76,77,78,79, 80 and 276

South By : V.No.33 & Sandur Taluk Boundary

East By : V.No.35 & S.Nos.71, 72, 74 and 76

West By : S.No.293, 306 to 310, 276 & 80

(a). Sale of immovable item which are described in the Schedule hereunder to satisfy the decree.”

6. Simultaneously, the decree holder had also filed an application to transmit the decree/ award under Order 21 Rule 5 of CPC read with Section 40. The Registry had raised objections to number the execution petition and put up the following note before the Master:-

“The above execution petition has been filed under EPD.No.38028 of 2017 by the learned counsel for the decree holder praying that “pleased to pass an order of attachment and sale of immovable properties of the judgement debtor, more fully described in the Schedule”.

After scrutinising the above said EPD.No.38028 of 2017, the Registry returned the above EP with the following endorsement:-

“It may be stated how this EP for attachment and sale of immovable and movable property is maintainable before this