Karnataka High Court
M/S Gowri Infra Engineers Pvt Ltd vs M/S P G Setty Construction on 16 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.7969 OF 2021(GM-CPC)
BETWEEN
M/S. GOWRI INFRA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,
NO.85, 8TH CROSS, WIDI LAYOUT
CHANDRALAYOUT
BENGALURU-560 040
REPRESENTED BY ITS M D
SRI C P UMESH
S/O PUTTASWAMY GOWDA
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SAMPATH A, ADVOCATE)
AND
M/S. P G SETTY CONSTRUCTION
TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD
NO.1056, KAVITHA VILAS
M G ROAD, CHAMARAJAPURAM
MYSURU-570 005.
PRESENTLY HAVING OFFICE AT
NO.74, SANDESH ARCADE
III FLOOR, SAUKAR CHENNAIAH ROAD
17TH MAIN ROAD
KUVEMPUNAGAR NORTH
SARASWATHIPURAM
MYSURU-570 009.
....RESPONDENT
(BY SRI ASHOK SHESHAGIRI, ADVOCATE A/W
SRI T SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 10TH MARCH, 2021 PASSED BY THE LXXXIX ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ON AN
APPLICATION MARKED AS IA.NO.6 FILED UNDER XXI RULE 46
READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
LATER THE SAID COURT TREATED THE SAME AS AN
APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER XXI RULE 52 OF CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE (DUE TO WRONG MENTIONING THE
PROVISION) BY THE RESPONDENT WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS
ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THE PETITION.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner herein is the judgment debtor in Com.Execution No.3182 of 2016 on the file of the LXXXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, challenging the order dated 10th march 2021 allowing IA.6 filed by the decree holder/respondent herein.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent herein has filed AC No.107 of 2015 before the Arbitral Tribunal against the petitioner herein, and the Arbitral award was passed on 30th July, 2016 (Annexure R to the statement of objections), directing the petitioners herein to pay the sum of 3 Rs.1,28,47,997/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of settlement, i.e. 05th March, 2013, till the date of relalisation. Pursuant to the same, the respondent herein has filed Execution Petition No.3182 of 2016. In the meanwhile, the petitioner herein has challenged the arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in AS No.141 of 2016 before the trial Court which also came to be dismissed and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein have filed Miscellaneous First Appeal No.7039 of 2017 before this Court, which came to be dismissed. In the meanwhile, the decree holder/respondent herein has filed IA.6 under Order XXI Rule 46 read with 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying the Execution Court to attach sum of Rs.14,34,509/- out of sum of Rs.19,24,861/- invested in State Bank of India, Cauvery Bhavan Branch, Bengaluru in Execution Petition No.1110 of 2017. The trial Court, after considering the material on record, by its order dated 10th March, 2021, allowed IA.6 filed by the decree holder under Order XXI Rule 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure by treating the same as an application filed under Order XXI Rule 4 52 of Code of Civil Procedure. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the judgment debtor has filed preferred this writ petition.
3. Sri Sampath A, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that once the principal amount is deposited before the Court, the judgment debtor is not liable to pay any interest on the said amount and accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court insofar as the finding recorded by the trial Court in the order impugned.
4. Per contra, Sri Ashok Sheshagiri, learned counsel appearing along with Sri T. Sheshagiri Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order passed by the trial Court and he also reiterated the averments made in the statement of objections, inviting the attention of the Court to the Annexure-R1-award dated 30th July, 2016 made by the learned Arbitrator in AC No.107 of 2015 and as such, the learned counsel prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that by 5 award dated 30th July, 2016 passed in AC No.107 of 2015, the judgment debtor/petitioner herein was directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,28,47,997/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The said Arbitral award was confirmed in AS No.141 of 2016 under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act as well as in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.7039 of 2017 under Section 37 of the Act, by this Court. In that view of the matter, the judgment debtor/petitioner herein is liable to honour the award made by the learned Arbitrator. In the meanwhile, the decree holder has filed an application in IA.6, under Order XXI Rule 46 read with Section of 151 Code of Civil Procedure, and the trial Court, after considering the material on record, by impugned order, has rightly allowed the application IA.6 by treating the said application under Order XXI Rule 52 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The finding recorded by the trial Court at paragraph 25 to 27 of the impugned order would indicate the reasons for allowing IA.6. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by this Court, is very limited and therefore, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is just 6 and proper and does not call for interference in this writ petition. Petition, accordingly, stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE lnn