The execution of an arbitration award under the Chit Fund Act, 1982, relative to a commercial dispute, must follow the procedural requirement of the Registrar forwarding the award to the jurisdictional Commercial Court, as parties possess no vested right to a specific procedural forum.

ORDER

Heard Sri P. Durga Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It is mentioned in the cause title of the revision that respondent Nos.2 to 5 are not necessary parties.

3. The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 05.03.2026 passed in E.P.No.03 of 2019 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kushaiguda.

4. The facts leading to filing of the present revision are as follows:-

i. 1st respondent is the subscriber of a chit with the petitioner herein, for Rs. 25,00,000/- which is payable at Rs.50,000/- per month for a period of 50 months.

ii. He has participated in the auction on 22.05.2011 and became successful bidder having agreed to forego an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- out of Chit value of Rs.25,00,000/-.

iii. The petitioner had paid Rs.15,00,000/- on 20.06.2011 to the 1st respondent.

iv. Respondent Nos.2 to 5 stood as guarantors to the said chit.

v. According to the petitioner, respondents failed to pay the said amount. Therefore, it has obtained an Award dated 15.12.2014 in Dispute No.369 of 2013 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Chits/Arbitrator, Ranga Reddy District (West) for Rs. 16,96, 477/- with interest at 18% per annum on the principal sum of Rs.14,00,000/- from the date of dispute to till the date of realization.

vi. Thus, the petitioner/Awardholder approached the Deputy Registrar of Chits, with a request to forward the Award and recovery certificate for execution. Accordingly, he has forwarded the same to the learned XVI Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Malkajgiri. The asme was numbered as E.P.No. 3 of 2019 by the learned Principal District Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kushaiguda, for recovery of Rs.31,15,809/- against the respondents.

vii. Placing reliance on the principle laid down in U.V.Satyanarayana vs. M/s Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. ¹Order dated 04.07.2024 in CRP No.740 of 2024 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. of the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, held that as per the terms of Section 2 (c) (i) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the subject transaction is commercial in nature, falling under the purview of the Commercial Courts Act, and granted leave to the Petitioner/Awardholder either to move for transfer of the said Execution Petition to the competent Commercial Court or in the alternative to withdraw the Execution Petition from the said Court and file fresh Execution Petition before the competent Commercial Court.

5. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed the present revision.

6. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the aforesaid Execution Petition filed by the petitioner before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kushaiguda, is maintainable and even then, learned Executing Court passed the impugned order. In support of his contention, he has also placed reliance on the principle laid down by a Division Bench of High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, in Madamanchi Anil Kumar vs. Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Limited ²Order dated 05.11.2018 in CRP No.2338 of 2018 by the High Court of AP at Amaravati. and Punyamuthula Venkata Viswa Sundara Rao and another vs. M/s Margadarsi Chit Fund Private Limited and others ³Order dated 14.03.2017 in CRP Nos.5236 of 2016 and batc