IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP(C).No. 1669 of 2011(O) AC.42/2009 OF DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER: -------------------- VINOD, THOPPINARIKIL HOUSE, EROOR, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENT: --------------- MANAPPURAM GENERAL FINANCE AND LEASING LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER (LEGAL DEPARTMENT) AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.SHAJU P.K., MANAPPURAM HOUSE, VALAPAD P.O., THRISSUR- 680 001. BY ADV. SRI.JOSIN PAUL SRI.V.AJITH THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION DATED 30.11.2010. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 3.2.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// AHZ/ K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ O.P.(C). NO. 1669 OF 2011 O ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT E.P.No.24 of 2011 in Arbitration Case No.42 of 2009 was filed by the respondent against the petitioner before the District Court, Ernakulam, to execute the arbitration award dated 25.5.2010. The Execution Petition was filed for realisation of a sum of `89,713/-. 2. The petitioner took a vehicle loan from the respondent. It is submitted that after paying some instalments, the petitioner surrendered the vehicle. It is stated that he was under the impression that sale of the vehicle would have fetched the balance amount due. However, he received notice in the Execution Petition in which further amount was claimed. It is stated that the petitioner did not receive any notice in the Arbitration Case and he did not receive copy of the award. It is submitted that since copy of the award was not served on the petitioner, he could not invoke Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. O.P.(C) NO.1669 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 3. The relief prayed for by the petitioner in this Original Petition is to direct the respondent to provide a copy of the award and to direct the District Court, Ernakulam to stay all further proceedings in E.P.No.24 of 2011 in Arbitration Case No.42 of 2009 till the petitioner gets an opportunity to challenge the award. There is also a prayer for a declaration that the award passed in Arbitration Case No.42 of 2009 is not binding on the petitioner as it was passed without issuing notice to the petitioner. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the time for filing an application for setting aside the arbitral award starts from the date of receipt of the award by the party who makes the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The counsel also submitted that under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, an O.P.(C) NO.1669 OF 2011 :: 3 :: Execution Petition would be maintainable only after the expiry of the time for making an application to set aside the arbitral award under Section 34 or when such an application was filed, after it has been refused. If the case of the petitioner is that he did not receive copy of the arbitral award, he can very well raise that contention before the executing court. The counsel for the respondent also submitted that as the award could be enforced only in the manner provided in Section 36, nothing prevents the petitioner from raising the contention before the executing court. The arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the respondent is sustainable. Leaving open the right of the petitioner to raise the aforesaid contentions before the executing court, the Original Petition is closed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/