Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 613 (HP)

Dharam Singh v. Ram Transport Finance Co Ltd

2018-04-11

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2018
JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J —By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 22.5.2017 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. in CS No. 102/10 of 2016 titled as Shri Ram Transport Finance Co. Vs. Dharam Singh & another may be quashed and set aside, in the interest of justice." 2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that an amount of Rs.3, 42, 000/- was raised by way of loan by the petitioner from the respondent-Finance Company for the purchase of a truck. As the petitioner did not pay the loan in terms of the agreement so entered into between him and the Finance Company, the matter at the behest of the Finance Company was referred for arbitration. The Arbitration Tribunal passed an award, which is appended with the petition as Annexure P-4. It is not in dispute that this award was not challenged by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and the same attained finality. This was followed by filing of an Execution Petition by the Finance Company in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, in which, the following order was passed on 07.09.2016: "..Execution petition received by entrustment. It be checked and registered. A perusal of file reveals that it is an execution application for execution of award dated 24.08.2015, however, judgment debtor no. 1 is resident of District Bilaspur (HP) whereas judgment debtor no. 2 is resident of District Mandi (HP) . As per provisions of Section 39(4) Code of Civil Procedure, this Court is not authorized to execute a decree against any person residing or property situated outside the local limits of its jurisdiction. Therefore, this petition is transferred to the Court of learned District Judge, Bilaspur (HP) for its execution. DH through counsel is directed to appear before learned District Judge Bilaspur on 03.11.2016. Ahlmad to complete the formalities and send necessary papers/certificates to the transferee Court as per rules. Copy of execution petition and this order be consigned to records, after due compliance." 3. DH through counsel is directed to appear before learned District Judge Bilaspur on 03.11.2016. Ahlmad to complete the formalities and send necessary papers/certificates to the transferee Court as per rules. Copy of execution petition and this order be consigned to records, after due compliance." 3. This was followed by the following order being passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur in Execution Petition No. 102/10 of 2016 on 22.05.2017: "..The present objections have been filed on the ground that award dated 24.08.2015 has been passed behind the back of the J.D. and the J.D. has filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for setting aside award which is pending for 21.04.2017. No opportunity of being heard was granted to the J.D. and award was passed by the Arbitrator against the public policy. The award has been filed without substantive evidence. 2. In the reply file, the said objections are resisted on the ground of maintainability. All the allegations raised in the objections are totally denied by the D.H. with the prayer to dismiss the objections. 3. So far as objections raised before this Court in execution by the J.D. are concerned, the objections are not relating to execution, discharge or satisfaction of the award. The executing Court cannot go behind the award and as such the present objections are not sustainable in the eyes of law and as such dismissed. Objections after registration be tagged with the main case file for record. Let warrant(s) of attachment against the properties of J.Ds. on filing list of properties and PF within 05 days be issued returnable for 03.07.2017." 4. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this petition praying for the reliefs mentioned above. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as also learned counsel for the respondent-Finance Company and have gone through the order passed by the learned Court below. 6. In my considered view, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the present petition. This is for the reason that the award passed under the Arbitration Act, for the execution of which the Execution Petition was filed, has attained finality. As the award passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal has attained finality, the executing Court but natural has to execute the same. This is for the reason that the award passed under the Arbitration Act, for the execution of which the Execution Petition was filed, has attained finality. As the award passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal has attained finality, the executing Court but natural has to execute the same. In view of there being no challenge to the award, which has resulted in the impugned order, in the course of execution of the same even otherwise petitioner cannot be permitted to assail the award which was attempted by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner also could not substantiate as to what was the infirmity with the order passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, as the same is strictly in consonance with the terms of the award so passed by learned Arbitral Tribunal. 8. Accordingly, as there is no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed, so also miscellaneous applications, if any. 9. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to approach the respondent-Finance Company for settlement of the issue. Learned counsel for the Finance Company submits that the said respondent is also not averse to any amicable settlement, provided the same may not be used as a tool to delay the matter. 10. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that in case any representation is filed by the petitioner for amicable settlement of the matter, then the respondent-Finance Company may consider the same sympathetically, but of course in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders upon the same as expeditiously as possible. Petition stands disposed of in above terms. Miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.