Telangana High Court
M/S. Hbl Power Systems Limited vs M/S Shakthi Concrete Industries ... on 12 December, 2023
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3588 of 2023
ORDER:(per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe) Mr. V.V.N.K. Sarath Saran, learned counsel appears for Mr. B. Rajeshwar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. Keerthi Prabhaker, learned counsel appears for respondent No.1.
2. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Additional Special Court in the Cadre of District Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes at Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commercial Court') in I.A.No.147 of 2023 in C.O.P.No.70 of 2022.
3. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition briefly stated are that an Award was passed on 04.06.2022. The petitioners challenged the validity of the aforesaid Award by filing CJ & JAK, J 2 CRP.No.3588 of 2023 C.O.P.No.70 of 2022 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the aforesaid C.O.P., I.A.No.79 of 2022 was filed by them under Section 34(3) of the Act seeking stay of the Award dated 04.06.2022.
4. Thereupon, the Commercial Court by an order dated 02.12.2022 stayed the Award dated 04.06.2022 subject to the condition of the petitioners depositing 50% of the amount awarded by the Arbitrator within a period of two (2) months and permitted respondent No.1 to withdraw the aforesaid amount without furnishing any security. Thereafter, the petitioners filed CRP.No.324 of 2023 before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2023 modified the order dated 02.12.2022 permitting respondent No.1 to withdraw 50% of the amount awarded by the Arbitrator by furnishing security.
5. Thereupon, respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed I.A.No.147 of 2023 seeking to accept the title deed dated 13.08.1982 in respect of the property measuring 366.33 sq.yards with built CJ & JAK, J 3 CRP.No.3588 of 2023 up area of 600 square feet of house bearing No.6-1-104 and 105/part situated at Padmarao Nagar, Secunderabad, as security. The Commercial Court has allowed the aforesaid application vide order dated 30.10.2023. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioners have filed the present petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are not the purchasers of the property mentioned in the sale deed but respondent No.2 is the nominee of one Smt. Shalini Deshpande.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has supported the order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Commercial Court.
8. We have considered the rival submissions made on both sides and have perused the record.
9. From perusal of the sale deed dated 13.08.1982, it is evident that the subject property has been sold by one Narayan Rao in favour of the three (3) purchasers namely, CJ & JAK, J 4 CRP.No.3588 of 2023 Mr. M. Manik Rao, Mr. P. Ravi Narayan and Mr. K. Gyan Sagar, who happens to be respondent No.2. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the aforesaid sale deed cannot be treated as a security is misconceived. The order passed by the Commercial Court does not suffer from either any infirmity or any error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference of this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
10. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ ________________________ ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J 12th DECEMBER, 2023.
kvni