1 CHS955.10.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 955 OF 2010 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 407 OF 2010 IN CASE NO. P-4 OF 2000 IN AWARD DATED 16TH MARCH 2009 Laddha Brothers Films Pvt. Ltd. ... Claimant. V/s. Vinay Kumar Sinha. ... Respondent. And Amod Vinay Sinha. ... Applicant. Mr. A.K. Saxena for the Claimant. Mr. Vinit B. Naik, Ms. Vatsal Shah i/b. Naik Paranjape & Co. for the Applicant. Mr. Gautam Ankhad i/b. Munir Merchant for the Respondent. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 25th NOVEMBER 2010. P.C. :- The Applicant has, by this Chamber Summons applied for raising of the attachment in regard to the Suit flat mentioned in the prayer clause (a) of the Chamber Summons and movables lying therein. 2. I have heard learned Counsels on both sides. The Applicant has produced large number of documents to show that the Suit flat is owned by him and one important 2 CHS955.10.sxw document is allotment letter issued by MHADA. Bills are also raised in the name of the Applicant. The learned Counsel for the Judgment Creditor submitted that the Respondent against whom the Award is passed has been residing in the Suit flat and that is how the flat came to be attached. Merely because the Respondent is said to be staying in the said flat, it cannot be said that the flat is owned by the Respondent. The articles attached in the inventory are in the nature of furniture and fixtures. If it is observed that that the flat is owned by the Applicant, there is no reason to say that the furniture and fixtures are owned by the present Respondent. 3. Apart from the aforesaid observation, it is required to be noted that alongwith the execution application, certified copy of the Award is filed. The said Award is said to have been passed by about 22 arbitrators. Their names are appearing on the page 2. Out of so many arbitrators, only 5 arbitrators have tendered their signatures. This document is obtained by the Judgment Creditor and relied upon for the purposes of execution of the Award which has now turned out to be a decree. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that if the Award is not signed by all the Arbitrators, it cannot be termed as an Award and hence, it cannot be put into execution. This argument was supported by the learned Counsel for the Respondent. 4. Learned Counsel for the Judgment Creditor submitted that the one set of arbitrators signed the Award and sent it to 3 CHS955.10.sxw the other set of arbitrators for signature. He submitted that a Roznama as regards passing of the Award is passed. Even if it is accepted that the minutes as regards passing of the Award is passed, if award which is duly typed on the stamp paper does not bare the signatures of all the arbitrators, it cannot be treated as an Award which can be put in execution. 4. In view of this, I am inclined to accept the stand of the Applicant that the attachment is required to be raised. 5. Hence, following order is passed to dispose of the Chamber Summons :- (i) The Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). (ii) Relief in terms of prayer clause (a) is rejected because the Applicant who is not a Judgment Debtor cannot apply for dismissal of the Execution Application. (iii) There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)