JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the entry regarding an attachment in the books of records of the registry. Such entry is made on the basis of an attachment Order issued by the Arbitrator in a proceeding between the 4^th respondent and the petitioner.

2. It is the petitioner’s case that the petitioner’s signature was forged and a loan was obtained from the 4^th respondent by one Alibava Haneef. According to the petitioner, he was not served with any notice in the arbitration proceedings. The 4^th respondent filed Execution Petition for enforcement of the Award, however, the same was dismissed, as evidenced from Ext.P4. Now, the petitioner seeks to get rid of the attachment effected by the Arbitrator. Petitioner relies on a bench decision of this Court in Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. v. Saneesha M.S. [ 2024 (6) KHC 238 ] to contend that an attachment communicated otherwise than through the Civil Court by the Arbitrator himself, is illegal, and therefore, the same is liable to be removed. To delete an illegal entry, it cannot be insisted that the petitioner should approach the Arbitrator at the first instance and the same has to be enforced through the Civil Court.

3. Heard t