IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 CRP.No. 417 of 2009(D) --------------------------------- (E.P.NO. 275/06 IN O.P.(ARB.).NO.62/1997 OF PRL.SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) .................... PETITIONERS/JUDGMENT DEBTORS: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER, KSHB, TRIVANDRUM. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSHB DIV,4, TRIVANDRUM. BY MR.A.JAYASANKAR, S.C, K.S.H.B, TVM. RESPONDENT/DECREE HOLDER: ------------------------------------------------ SRI. JAYARAJ P.V, CONTRACTOR, ASHA MANDIRAM, PAZHAKUTTY, NEDUMANGAD P.O. (NOW RESIDING AT SREE VISWAM, THIRUMALA, TRIVANDRUM). BY ADV. MR. BIJU BALAKRISHNAN. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P. BHAVADASAN, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= C.R.P. No. 417 of 2009 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 18th day of March, 2010 O R D E R Aggrieved by the order dated 30-5-2009 in E.P. No.275 of 2006 in O.P.(Arb.) No.62 of 1997 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, the judgment debtors have come up in revision. 2. In relation to a contract between the respondent and the petitioners before the court below, arbitration proceedings were initiated. The Arbitrator passed an award. The matter was referred to the court below and decree was passed. In the decree it was mentioned that the petitioner is entitled to 18% per annum from the date of reference. That matter was taken in appeal as Arb. Appeal No.24 of 2006 by the petitioners herein. This Court confirmed the decree. The matter was taken in appeal as S.L.P. to the apex court. That was dismissed. In execution it is stated that 18% of interest from date of cause of action. 3. It is pointed out that as per the decree as confirmed by this Court and up held by the apex court, 18% interest is from the date of reference and not from the date of cause of action. CRP 417/09 2 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners points out that the court below has held that 18% interest is available from the date of cause of action. In fact 18% is only available from the date of reference. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on a decision of this Court reported in Milk Food Ltd. V. GMC Ice Cream (P) Ltd. (2004 (3) KLT SN 136) to support his contention. 5. As regards the first issue regarding the date of interest, there may be no dispute at all. Decree passed by the Sub Court, confirmed by this Court and apex court is clear that interest from the date of reference. The finding of the court below that 18% interest is available from the date of cause of action is wrong. There is also dispute regarding the date from which the date of reference is to be computed. That does not seem to have been raised and considered by the court below. Leaving open that question for decision, if it is raised, this petition is disposed of. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. mn.