AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The matter comes up on application no.1/2019 for passing interim orders and application no.1/2020 for early hearing preferred by the petitioners.
With the consent of both the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard and decided.
The dispute between the parties arose out of an arbitration proceedings which were initiated by the respondent for recovery of Rs.2,34,14,008.51p. From the petitioners jointly and severally with interest thereon at 24% per annum from 18.9.2014 till realisation with costs. The arbitration proceedings were allowed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties on 7.3.2017. The Arbitrator in lieu of the compromise dated 7.3.2017, passed the award on 20.3.2017 in the following terms :-
"5) In view of the above compromise memo an award is passed as folows :
a) In the result, I pass an Award directing Respondents 1 to 3 jointly and severally to pay to the claimant Rs.2,34,14,008.51/-ps with interest thereon at 18% per annum from 18.09.2014 till realization with costs of Rs.1,01,150/- made up the Arbitrator's fee of Rs.1,00,000/-Arbitrator's expenses of Rs.1000/- and value of Non-judicial stamps Rs.150/-.
b) If however, if the respondents pay a sum of Rs.1,85,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore and eighty five Lakhs only) as stated below, the entire amount as per 5(a) shall stand fully discharged.
I) A sum of Rs.10,090,000/- on or before 31.03.2017;
ii) A sum of Rs.1,75,00,000/- on or before 31.03.2018 (as per the terms of the compromise)
iii) Any amount paid after 31.03.2018 and before 30.09.2018 shall carry interest at 12% per annum.
c) If the respondents failed to pay the amount shown under clause 5 (b) on or before the due dates as per clause 5 (b), the claimant is entitled to execute the award as per clause 5 (a) (less the amount if any paid by the respondents as per clause 5 (b)),after 30/09/2018.
d) Time is the essence of the Compromise
e) If the respondents pay the amount as per clause 5 (b) on or before the due dates, the claimant is directed to bear the fees and expenses of the Arbitrator"
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while the execution proceedings were going on, an application was moved by the petitioners for transferring the matter from the learned Court below under Section 24 C.P.C. on the ground that a cost of Rs.5,000/- has been imposed upon the petitioners while disposing of their application under Order 21 Rule 66 CPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that on such dismissal of the application under Order 21 Rule 66 CPC and imposition of cost of Rs.5,000/-, the petitioners lost their faith in the learned Court below and thus, it was a fit case for transfer.
Learned counsel for the respondent submits that merely an application has been dismissed and cost has been imposed, does not make the petitioners entitle to seek transfer of the case as they have not been able to show any substantial ground for transferring the case. Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the order dismissing the application under Order 21 Rule 66 CPC has not been challenged by the petitioners in any Court of law.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the material available on record, this Court finds that in the application Annex.8, the only ground given by the petitioners seeking transfer is that their application has been dismissed with a cost of Rs.5,000/-. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to show any other reason for seeking such transfer. This Court is not satisfied that the reason given in the transfer petition that application has been dismissed with cost, will not entitle a party to resort to transfer. Moreover, this Court takes note of the fact that the order dismissing the application under Order 21 Rule 66 CPC has not been challenged by the petitioners in any Court of law.
In view of the above, the transfer petition, having no force, is hereby dismissed.
All pending applications also stand dismissed.