Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
E. Murthy and ors. – Petitioners
Versus
M/s. Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited and ors. – Respondents
C.R.P.No.260 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.2138 of 2023
Decided On : 07-02-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Praying to strike off proceedings - Execution of decree - Petition is filed praying to strike off proceedings - Held, Presuming that ground raised is correct, remedy available to revision petitioner is preferring an appeal and once a decree is passed, Execution Court cannot adjudicate issues on merits and thus, revision petitioner has to seek appropriate relief by approaching appropriate Forum - Scope of Execution proceedings cannot be expanded for purpose of adjudication of issues on merits - Thus, ground raised by revision petitioner cannot be considered for purpose to strike off Execution Proceedings and revision petitioner is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings - Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to strike off the proceedings in E.P.3465/2022 in A.C.P.No.325 of 2020 pending on the file of the XXVI Asst City Civil Court at Chennai.
The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to strike off the proceedings in E.P.No.3465 of 2022 in A.C.P.No.325 of 2020 pending on the file of the XXVI Asst City Civil Court at Chennai.
2. The revision petitioners are the judgment debtors and borrowed loan from the respondent. On account of default in payment of instalments, the respondent company instituted proceedings in A.C.P.No.325 of 2020 and an Award was passed by the competent Court. The respondent/decree holder filed an Execution Petition for execution of the decree and the revision petitioner now filed the present Civil Revision Petition mainly on the ground that no summon was served on the revision petitioner in the Arbitral proceedings.
3. Presuming that the ground raised is correct, the remedy available to the revision petitioner is preferring an appeal and once a decree is passed, Execution Court cannot adjudicate the issues on merits and thus, the revision petitioner has to seek appropriate relief by approaching the appropriate Forum. The scope of Execution proceedings cannot be expanded for the purpose of adjudication of issues on merits. Thus, the ground raised by the revision petitioner cannot be considered for the purpose to strike off the Execution Proceedings and the revision petitioner is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings.
4. With this liberty, the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.260 of 2023 stands dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
A revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be used to strike off execution proceedings when an ex parte decree has attained finality and no stay of proceedings is in operation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Order 21 Rule 29 C.P.C, which requires specific conditions to be met for staying execution proceedings in the....
High Court directs time-bound disposal of appeal under Article 227 to prevent hardship from delayed stay applications amid execution.
An executing court cannot go behind an arbitral award that has attained finality.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
