AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Kannan, J. (Oral) - The revision is against the order passed by the executing court while enforcing the award of the Arbitrator. The contention taken by the judgment debtors was that in respect of yet another contract, which is not subject of arbitral reference, the petitioners had submitted a tender and deposited Rs. 2 lakhs which was not accepted. They had already made a demand for return of Rs. 2 lakhs but they did not comply with the same. The said amount of Rs. 2 lakhs was claimed by the judgment debtors to be adjusted against the amount claimed by the FCI.
There can be no adjustment with reference to an amount which is not an amount assured under a decree or under an award. A disputed claim for refund of Rs. 2 lakhs cannot be sought for attachment in enforcement of an award passed before the Arbitrator. If at all, there was a scope for adjustment, it could have been pressed before the Arbitrator before the award was passed and cannot be pressed post facto the arbitral award.
The order passed rejecting the objections given by the judgment debtors was justified and there is no scope for interference in revision. However, the petitioners will have an independent right to press for their alleged right to claim back Rs. 2 lakhs said to have been given to the FCI in respect of yet another contract through independent proceedings, if so advised and if competent.