Kerala High Court
Marymatha Infrastructure Private Ltd vs The Superintending Engineer on 18 February, 2026
Author: T.R. Ravi
Bench: T.R.Ravi
2026:KER:14663
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 29TH MAGHA, 1947
OP(C) NO.895 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 31.03.2022 IN EP NO.283 OF 2021
IN ARBITRATION CASE No.1/2018 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT/COMMERCIAL
COURT, PALAKKAD
-----------------
PETITIONER/DECREE HOLDER :-
MARYMATHA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LTD.
(FORMERLY MARYMATHA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY)
MARYMATHA SQUARE, ARAKKUZHA ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686 661
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
BY ADVS.
SRI.ARUN KRISHNA DHAN
SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR
SRI.T.K.SANDEEP
SRI.ALEX ABRAHAM
SMT.SWETHA R.
SRI.HARIKRISHNAN P.B.
SRI.CYRIL C. GEORGE
RESPONDENTS/JUDGMENT DEBTOR & GARNISHEE :-
1 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
O/O. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKD DEPARTMENT (BUILDINGS),
NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673 001
2 THE SPECIAL OFFICER
GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, KUNNETHURMEDU.P.O.,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 013
3 THE TREASURY OFFICER
DISTRICT TREASURY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 001
BY SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN, GP
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.02.2026, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(C) No.895 of 2022
-: 2 :-
2026:KER:14663
T.R. RAVI, J.
-------------------------------
OP(C) No.895 of 2022
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of February, 2026
JUDGMENT
The prayer in this Original Petition is to set aside Ext.P3 and to hold that the Execution Petition is maintainable before the Commercial Court, Palakkad. The Commercial Court, by Ext.P3, ordered that the Execution Petition has to be preferred before the District Court in view of the decision of this Court in Shaji Augustin v. Chithra Woods Manors Welfare Association [2021 ICO 2246].
2. The issue has been subsequently considered by this Court and it has been held that execution proceedings have to be initiated before the Commercial Court (see :
Karthik Exports (M/s) v. Krishna Kumar Agarwal [2025 KHC 309]). In the above circumstances, the reasoning in Ext.P3 cannot be sustained. Ext.P3 is set aside.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the execution application has been returned with a direction to present before the proper court. The OP(C) No.895 of 2022 -: 3 :- 2026:KER:14663 petitioner is permitted to re-present or file a fresh application before the Commercial Court and the Commercial Court shall pass necessary orders on the same.
The Original Petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI JUDGE Jvt/ OP(C) No.895 of 2022 -: 4 :- 2026:KER:14663 APPENDIX OF OP(C) NO. 895 OF 2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS :-
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD DATED 31.05.2019 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE E.P. NO.283/2021 ON THE FILE OF COMMERCIAL COURT PALAKKAD Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.03.2022 OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB-COURT (COMMERCIAL COURT ) PALAKKAD Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT (COPY AS REPORTED IN 2021 ICO 2246 CORRESPONDING TO 2022(1) KLJ
443) Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.07.2018 IN FAO (OS) NO.166/2016 OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.02.2019 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 216/2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF GUJRAT