Dismissed

S. Srinivasan v. M/S. Shriram City Union

Madras HC6 Sept 2021CRP/944/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Krishnan Ramasamy disposed of two Civil Revision Petitions under Article 115 CPC challenging an execution order. The court dismissed the petitions, directing the petitioners to pay the remaining balance of Rs. 12,777/- within four weeks, observing that their payment of 95% of the claim negated any fault for further review.

What did the court decide?

Revision petitions dismissed. Petitioners directed to pay the balance sum of Rs. 12,777/- within four weeks. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

S. Srinivasan Vs M/S. Shriram City Union — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.09.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy

¶6

CRP (NPDs)Nos.944 & 1049 of 2015
and
C.M.P.Nos.1 &1 of 2015
S.Srinivasan .. Revision Petitioner in
C.R.P.(NPD) No.944 of 2015
1.D.Ramachandran
2.S.Pandian .. Revision Petitioners 1 and 2
in C.R.P.(NPD) No.1049 of 2015
vs.
M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,
S.Dhandapani,
No.123, Angappa Naicken Street,
Chennai-600 001. ..Respondent in both CRPs
PRAYER in C.R.P.(NPD) No.944 of 2015

¶7

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure to allow the Civil Revision Petition and set aside the order passed in E.P. No.2276 of 2013 in ACP No. [EF/CMS 035 of 2012] on the file of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 06.01.2015.

¶8

1/7

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶10

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶11

PRAYER in C.R.P.(NPD) No.1049 of 2015:

¶12

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure to allow the Civil Revision Petition and set aside the fair and decreetal order passed in E.P. No.2274 of 2013 in A.C.P.No. [EF/CMS 035 of 2012] on the file of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 06.01.2015.

¶13

Appearance of the counsels in both C.R.Ps.

¶14

For Revision Petitioners : M/S.C.K.M.Appaji For Respondent : Mr.K.V.Anantha Krishnan

¶15

COMMON O R D E R

¶16

Both the Civil Revision Petitions have been filed against the order

¶17

passed in E.P. Nos.2274 and 2276 of 2013 in ACP No. [EF/CMS 035 of 2012] on the file of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 06.01.2015.

¶18

2 . According to the learned counsel for the respondent, Execution Petitions were filed by the respondent for recovery of a sum of

¶19

Rs.2,61,387/-, consequent to the arbitration award passed by the Arbitrator, dated 22.06.2012. The Executing Court was pleased to allow the Execution

¶20

2/7

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶22

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶23

Petitions, by order dated 06.01.2015. Against the said order, C.R.P.(NPD) No.944 of 2015 was filed by the judgement debtor. Insofar as C.R.P.No.1049 of 2015 is concerned, the same was filed by the guarantors.

¶24

When the matters are taken up for hearing, the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent would submit that, as on 10.01.2021, the
revision petitioners have paid a sum of Rs.2,48,610/- and the balance
amount, which the revision petitioners are liable to pay is Rs.12,777/- only.
The details of the same is furnished in a tabulated column, mentioned
below:-
S.No Description Amount
1. EP CLAIM Rs.2,61,387/-
2. Less:- Payment received on the
following dates:
23.06.2014 - Rs. 20,000/-
17.12.2016 - Rs.1,65,620/-
-
12.10.2017 - Rs. 62,990/
Rs.2,48,610/- Rs.2,48,610/-
3. Balance payable amount Rs. 12,777/-

¶25

3/7

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶27

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶28

4. When the matters are taken up for hearing on the last occasion

¶29

(i.e. 02.09.2021), this Court suggested the learned counsel for the revision petitioner to get instructions from his clients and ascertain whether the revision petitioners are ready and willing to pay the balance sum of Rs.12,777/- to the respondent. However, the learned counsel informed that he is not able to contact his clients (revision petitioners) and hence,

¶30

requested this Court to pass suitable and appropriate orders.

¶31

5. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the

¶32

materials available on record.

¶33

6. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the present Civil

¶34

Revision Petitions were filed in the year 2015. At the time of filing the Revision Petitions, the total amount due to be payable by the revision petitioners was Rs.2,61,387/-. Subsequently, the revision petitioners have paid substantial sum of Rs.2,48,610/-. This shows that the revision petitioners are admitting the claim amount and have paid nearly 95% of the

¶35

4/7

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶37

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶38

entire suit claim and the balance, which the revision petitioners are liable to pay is Rs.12,777/-.

¶39

7. In view of the fact and circumstances of the case, this Court is of

¶40

the view that though the Revision petitioners have filed Revision Petitions challenging the orders passed by the Executing Court, since they have fairly accepted the order passed by the Executing Court and paid 95% of the total claim, nothing survives for further adjudication in the Revision Petitions to

¶41

find out any fault in the decision making process of the Executing Court.

¶42

8. Therefore, this Court, while agreeing with the findings of the

¶43

Executing Court, holds that nothing survives for further adjudication in these Revision Petitions.

¶44

9. In the result, both the Civil Revision Petitions stands dismissed. However, since the revision petitioners are liable to be pay the balance sum of Rs.12,777/-, they are hereby directed to pay the said amount

¶45

within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶46

5/7

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶48

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶49

order. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are

¶50

closed.

¶51

06.09.2021

¶52

Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking Order
jd/sd
To
The X Assistant Judge,
City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶53

6/7

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

¶55

CRP (NPD)Nos.944 &1049 of 2015

¶56

Krishnan Ramasamy, J.,

¶57

jd/sd

¶58

CRP (NPDs)Nos.944 & 1049 of 2015
&
C.M.P.Nos.1 of 2015
06.09.2021

¶59

7/7

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

S. Srinivasan v. M/S. Shriram City Union

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Srinivasan v. M/S. Shriram City Union

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Srinivasan, Vs M/S.Margadarsi Chits

Sri Sithi Vinayagar Aalayam Vs Duraisami Naidu (Died)

Rajeswari Vs Senthilkumar

V.Sambanthan Vs Ravi

South East Benefit Fund Vs K.V. Ramanan

The Manager Vs D. Ravichandra @ Ravi