High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 11 CAL CK 0042

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Limited vs Samir Mondal & Anr

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 28 November 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Soumen Sen, J
CASE NUMBER
Execution Case No. 560, 561, 562, 563, 564, 565, 566, 568, 569, 571 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 427 words

The Court : Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the award-holder has relied upon an reported Division Bench judgment of this Court being

Magma Fincorp Limited vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors. reported in 2018 (1) CHN (Cal) 391, dated 13th September, 2017, where the Hon’ble Division

Bench had considered the aspect of service of award upon the judgment-debtor. In deciding the said application, the Hon’ble division Bench has

referred to Clause 9(b) of the arbitration agreement between the parties in the said proceeding, Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, Section 3 of

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Chapter VI of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898. Similar clause as that of 9(b) that was considered by the

Hon’ble Division Bench is present in the instant arbitration agreement.

 The records revealed that the envelopes said to contain the award was forwarded by the Arbitral Tribunal by a letter dated 15th May, 2017. The

envelope was addressed to the respondents at the addresses mentioned in the arbitration agreement and proper stamps were affixed thereon. The

Arbitrator has also paid postal charges by affixing prepaid adhesive postage stamps and the postal article duly put in by registered post in the manner

provided in Chapter VI of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898. The postal envelope said to contain the said award was dispatched on 16th May, 2017.

Hence, having regard to the fact that the award was sent to the last known address of the judgment debtors, it shall be presumed that the award has

been duly served upon the judgment debtors. The time to challenge the award has, in the meantime, expired. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner

that the award is not under challenge.

Under such circumstances, it shall be presumed that the award has been duly served upon the judgment-debtors. In view of the Hon’ble Division

Bench judgment and having regard to the factual position as discussed above, in my view, the award-holder is able to demonstrate service of the

award upon the judgment â€" debtors.

The judgment-debtors are directed to file their individual affidavits of assets in Form no. 16A of Appendix-E of the Code of Civil Procedure within

four weeks from the date of communication of the order, failing which warrants of arrest may be issued against the judgment-debtors.

The matter stands adjourned till January 22, 2019.

The petitioner shall communicate this order along with a copy of the application upon the judgment debtors within a week from date and shall file the

affidavit of service on the adjourned date.