Zile Singh vs M/s. Magma Fincorp Ltd.

L.N. Mittal, J.—Judgment-debtor (JD) Zile Singh has filed this revision petition impugning order dated 03.08.2013, passed by learned Additional District Judge, thereby dismissing objection petition (Annexure P-5) filed by the petitioner in execution petition (Annexure P-3), which has been instituted by respondent-decree-holder (DH) against the petitioner, for execution of Arbitration Award dated 21.03.2009 (Annexure P-1). I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had taken loan from the respondent for purchase of car, which met with accident, intimation whereof was given to the respondent and insurance claim amount of the damaged car is to be adjusted towards the outstanding amount. It was also contended that interest at exorbitant rate of 36% per annum has been awarded by the Arbitrator, which is required to be slashed to reasonable rate.

I have carefully considered the aforesaid contentions, but the same are completely irrelevant for the disposal of the instant revision petition.

The petitioner received Award dated 21.03.2009 from the Arbitrator vide forwarding letter of even date. The petitioner, through his counsel, then sent notice dated 04.06.2009 (Annexure P-2) to the respondent as well as to Insurance Company. It would depict that the petitioner had received the Award on or before 04.06.2009. However, the petitioner did not file any objection against the said Award u/s 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short-the Act) within limitation period of three months extendable by further period of 30 days only and not thereafter. Consequently, the Arbitration Award has attained finality. In fact, the petitioner has not filed any objection against the Award u/s 34 of the Act till date. On the other hand, objection petition (Annexure P-5) has been filed in the execution petition and the same is not tenable so as to challenge the Award. Even objection petition (Annexure P-5) is dated 10.05.2012 and thus, it has been filed after three years of the Award. Consequently, the objection petition to challenge the Award has been rightly dismissed by the Executing Court. For the reasons aforesaid, I find no perversity, illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order passed by the Executing Court so as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The revision petition is completely meritless and frivolous and is accordingly dismissed in limine.