IMPORTANT POINT
The definition of 'Registrar' under the Chit Funds Act includes Deputy Registrars, and a certificate issued by a Deputy Registrar is sufficient for the execution of an arbitral award.

ORDER :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order dated 05.04.2018 in R.E.A.No.239 of 2013 in R.E.P.No.43 of 2009 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Court, Salem.

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Executing Court allowing the application filed by the 1st respondent under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code.

2. Heard argument of learned counsel for the petitioner. Though the respondents are served and their names are appeared in the cause-list, there is no representation for the respondents.

3. The petitioner herein obtained an award against the respondents for a sum of Rs.4,23,013/- under the provisions of Chit Funds Act, 1982. The same was put into execution by the petitioner in R.E.P.No.43 of 2009. The 1st respondent/Judgement Debtor No.5 filed an application in R.E.A.No.239 of 2013 under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code raising following objections against the execution of the arbitral award:-

“a) The petitioner/Decree holder has not filed a certificate as contemplated under Section 55(2) of the Chit Fund Rule, 1989, so as to enable him to execute the award. Hence three executions have to be rejected since it is only an award under section 71(b) of Chit Funds Act, not a decree as contemplated under Section 71(a) of Chit Fund Act.

b) The Chit Funds Act does not provide any Arbitration proceedings initiated by Foreman against surety and the contract of surety of guarantee is so applicable to the Chit Funds Act.

c) Thirdly without issuing a notice under Section 33(1) of Chit Funds Act, the 1st respondent-Foreman cannot demand or claim consolidated payment from a defaulting prized subscriber. Whereas in the present award in Ar.O.P.No.169/09 admittedly, the Foreman-respondent has not issued any such notice to the subscriber. Hence the exparte award passed against the petitioner/J.D.No.5 for consolidated payment is a nullity and the same cannot be executed.

d) While awarding the Arbitrator has passed and award of Rs.4,23,013/- and the award amount shall carry interest at 24% per annum from date of award till realization. Awarding interest at 24% per annum is against law and the Arbitrator has no such authority to grant interest in the manner set out in the award. Hence the Arbitrator has acted beyond the scope of Section 64 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982. Hence the award passed against the petitioner and respondents No.2 to 5 is nullity and in executable.

... ... ... ...

a) That the Chit Funds Act does not provide for any arbitration in respect of a claim by the Foreman against the surety.

b) That the arbitrator has no power to pass exparte award and the award passed against the petitioner is a nullity.

c) That the arbitrator has no authority to grant interest in the manner set out in the award.

d) That the arbitrator has acted beyond the scope of Section 64 of Chit Funds Act.

e) That initiated three proceedings against different judgment debtors for the recovery of on and same decree amount is bad or not?”

4. The Executing Court framed the following points for consideration in the execution application filed by the 1st respondent:-

“(i) Whether the award of the arbitrator has been made as decree of civil court and transmitted to this Court for execution as per Civil Procedure Code?

(ii) Whether the award passed by the Arbitrator is valid in law and executable before this Court?

(iii) Whether the Decree Holder is entitled to proceed against the Principal Debtor and the Guarantors simultaneously?

(iv) Whether the Decree holder is entitled to file simultaneous execution petitions against different Judgment Debtors for different relieves for same decree amount?

(v) Whether the interest awarded under the decree is in contravention of Chit Fund Act and Rules?

(vi) Whether the award was passed in contravention of Sec.64 of Chit Funds Act?

(vii) Whether the petitioner is enti