IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.04.2022

CORAM:

Mr. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

CRP(NPD)No.3175 of 2019

1.P.K.Venkatesh (died)

2.S.Venkateshwari

3.V.Dhanusudhan

4.Minor V.Joshitha

Rep. by her Nature Guardian and Mother

S.Venkateshwari

(Petitioners 2 to 4 brought on record as LRs of

the deceased Sole Petitioner viz. P.K.Venkatesh

vide Court order dated 14.03.2022 made in

C.M.P.No.3443 of 2022 in Crl.No.3175 of

2019 by NSSJ)

...Petitioners

Vs.

1.Shriram Chits Tamil Nadu (P) Ltd,

Amman Complex, 2^nd Floor,

No.159 – A, Mettur Road,

Erode.

Now business at D.No.10, LKA Tower,

141/2, Perundurai Road,

Erode – 11, Rep. By its Foreman.

2.P.Sankar,

Son of Palaniappan

... Respondents

PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115

of the Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the Fair and

Decretal Order dated 24.07.2019 made in E.A.No.51 of 2017 in

E.A.No.51 of 2016 in E.P.No.79 of 2013 in Arbitration No.44 of

2005 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Perundurai.

For Petitioners :

Mr.B.Vijayakumar

for Mr.R.Babu

For R1

:

Mr.Adarsh Subramanian

for Mr.V.Prakash Babu

For R2

:

Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan

for Mr.M.Guruprasad

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

O R D E R

The revision petitioners herein are the heirs of a

Judgment Debtor in E.P.No.79 of 2013 which was laid by the

respondent for executing an award of the Arbitrator in

Arbitration Case No.44 of 2005. The E.P.No.79 of 2013 was laid

before the Sub Court, Perundurai.

2.1 As per the award, the Judgment Debtor was required

to pay a sum of Rs.8,74,237/- with interest at 24% p.a. to the

Decree Holder. The Execution Petition was laid for attachment

and sale of two items of properties of the Judgment Debtor.

Proper notice was served, but the Judgement Debtor did not

appear and consequently an exparte order of attachment was

passed. Later, sale proclamation was ordered, upset price were

fixed which was thereafter came to be reduced by the Execution

Court, and on 07.11.2015, both the items of the properties were

sold in court auction to the 2^nd respondent herein. The entire

sale consideration too was paid, and accordingly the sale came

to be confirmed and a sale certificate too was issued to the 2^nd

respondent on 23.04.2016.

2.2 Be that as it may, the Judgment Debtor had filed

E.A.No.11 of 2017 under Order 21 Rule 90 C.P.C. raising certain

objections to the auction. This application was taken out by him

almost immediately after the entire sale price was deposited by

the auction purchaser in the Court and before the sale

certificate was issued. However, this application was returned

for curing some defects and it was re-presented almost after a

year. It is in this interregnum, the sale certificate came to

be issued. Indeed, before E.A.No.11 of 2017 was taken on its

file, the auction purchaser had moved the Court for delivery of

the properties purchased by him.

3.So far as E.A.No.11 of 2017 is concerned, this

application came to be dismissed on 03.07.2017 and this was

challenged by the Judgment Debtor in C.R.P(NPD).No.3174 of 2017.

On 13.08.2018, the C.R.P.No.3174 of 2017 came to be dismissed by

this Court for default.

4.Thereafter, a certain Selvaraj and Subramani took out a

set of applications, obstructing delivery of properties and all

these came to be dismissed on 25.10.2018. The 2^nd respondent

took out E.A.No.80 of 2017 for removal of obstruction and that

was allowed on 31.10.2017. It is at this juncture, E.A.No.51 of

2017 was filed by the auction purchaser for seeking effective

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

police protection for effecting delivery. This is ordered by

the Execution Court on 24.07.2019 and this is now being

challenged by the legal heirs of the Judgment Debtor since the

Judgment Debtor had passed away by now.

5.Heard Mr.B.Vijayakum