Allowed

Syed Abdul Hameed v. Mohammed Khaleel

Telangana HC12 Dec 2014CRP/4016/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in a Civil Revision Petition set aside an execution order passed by the Additional District Judge. The Court held that once an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is filed, the Executing Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce the award. Liberty was granted to the decree-holders to seek interim relief in the court where the Section 34 application is pending.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Order dated 21.08.2014 in Execution Petition No.4 of 2014 in Arbitration Case No.79 of 2009 was set aside. Liberty was granted to decree-holders to apply for interim relief.

Syed Abdul Hameed Vs Mohammed Khaleel — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶3

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4016 OF 2014

¶4

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)

¶5

This Civil Revision Petition, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’), is directed against the Order, dated 21.08.2014, in Execution Petition No.4 of 2014 in Arbitration Case No.79 of 2009 passed by the Additional District Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District.

¶6

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that once the application is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘the Act’), the Executing Court cannot enforce the award.

¶7

3. However, the decree holders can approach the Court, in which the application under Section 34 of the Act is filed seeking interim relief or to protect his interest under Section 9 of the Act. The Court, which passed the attachment order lacks jurisdiction in view of the language employed under Section 42 of the Act. This aspect of the case has been covered by the judgment of this Court, dated 03.12.2014, in Civil Revision Petition No.3875 of 2014.

¶8

4. Following the said order, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned Order, dated 21.08.2014, in Execution Petition No.4 of 2014 in Arbitration Case No.79 of 2009 passed by the Additional District Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. However, liberty is given to the decree-holders to file an

¶9

application before the IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad Court, in which the application under Section 34 of the Act is pending, seeking any interim protection under Section 9 of the Act. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this revision shall stand closed.

¶10

________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶11

___________ JUSTICE ANIS

¶12

Date:12.12.2014 Note: Registry is directed to attach copy of the order, dated 03.12.2014 in C.R.P.No.3875 of 2014 to this order. (B/o) INL

Syed Abdul Hameed v. Mohammed Khaleel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Abdul Hameed v. Mohammed Khaleel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T. Madan Mohan Reddy, Vs Sri B.R. Meena, I.A.S.

Hajahshariff Mohammad Vs Special Deputy Collector, L.a.Ongc., Rajahmundry

S.Kiran, Vs The Government of Telangana

Medishetty Rajyalaxmi E.G. Dist. Vs Prl. Secy. Rev. Dept. and 5 Ors.

Grandhi Aravindam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kandelli Bhishma Gangeyudu S/o.Late Veeranna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh