AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Venugopal, J.—The Petitioner/Respondent/Transport Corporation has filed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 13.08.2010 in E.P. No. 3 2 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 72 of 2005 passed by the Executing Court viz., the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sub-Court, Paramakudi.
The Respondent/Petitioner/Decree holder has filed E.P. No. 3 of 2010 in M.C.O.P. No. 72 of 2005 under Order 21 Rule 11 of CPC before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, viz., Sub-Court, Paramakudi. In E.P. No. 3 of 2010, the Respondent/ Petitioner/Decree holder has sought for a relief of attaching the property shown in the schedule in the E.P petition and to bring the same into auction by issuance of a notice as per Order 21 Rule 22 of CPC to the Revision Petitioner/Respondent/ Transport Corporation etc.
Admittedly, an award in M.C.O.P. No. 72 of 2005 has been passed on 30.03.2007, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal viz., the learned sub-Judge, Paramakudi, directing the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation to pay a sum of Rs. 1,35,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Thirty Five Thousand only) together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum payable to the Respondent/Decree holder.
Aggrieved against the said award passed in M.C.O.P. No. 72 of 2005 dated 30.03.2007, on the file of the learned sub-Judge, Paramakudi, the Respondent/ Decree holder has preferred A.A.O(MD) No. 1598/2008 and the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation has also preferred C.M.A. No. 767 of 3 2008 filed by the Transport Corporation which has been dismissed by this Court on 24.04.2009. However, in A.A.O.(MD)1598 of 2008 filed by the Respondent/Petitioner/Decree holder, an award amount of Rs. 1,35,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Thirty Five Thousand only) determined by the Tribunal has been enhanced to Rs. 2,10,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Ten Thousand only).
The learned Counsel for the Respondent/ Petitioner/Decree holder informs this Court that the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation has paid a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Sixty Five Thousand only) towards the award amount. For the balance a sum of Rs. 1,08,776/- (Rupees One Lakh Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Six only) payable by the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation, the Respondent/Petitioner/Decree holder has projected the E.P. No. 3 of 2010 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, viz., the learned sub-Judge, Paramakudi and the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation has remitted a sum of Rs. 97,000/- (Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand only) before the executing Court to the credit of E.P. No. 3 of 2010. Still the Revision Petitioner/ Transport Corporation owes a sum of Rs. 11,000/-(Rupees Eleven Thousand only) together with subsequent interest thereto. In E.P No. 3 of 2010 the Executing Court/Claims Tribunal, Sub-Judge, Paramakudi on 13.08.2010 has passed an order of attachment after hearing of both sides and it is a contested order.
On going through the order of the Executing Court in E.P. No. 3 of 2010 dated 13.08.2010, it is quite evident that the Executing Court has opined that there is no stay order in regard to the award passed in M.C.O.P. No. 72 of 2005 and therefore, the Respondent/ Decree holder is entitled to avail the benefits as per award and viewed in the perspective, it has come to the conclusion that E.P property can be attached and the matter has been adjourned to 13.09.2010 and for payment of attachment of batter, time has been granted after 31.08.2010 etc. On 13.08.2010, the Executing Court has observed that the property has been attached and for perusal of records and further payment, the Executing Court has posted the matter on 24.09.2010. Only against that order passed by the Executing Court dated 13.08.2010 in E.P. No. 3 of 2010, the Transport Corporation has preferred the Civil Revision Petition. Indeed, the impugned order of the Executing Court dated 13.08.2010, in E.P. No. 3 of 2010, does not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity and the same is a valid, fair and just order in the eye of law.
Inasmuch as the Revision Petitioner has remitted a sum of Rs. 97,000/-(Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand only) to the credit of E.P. No. 3 of 2010 claiming amount of Rs. 1,08,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Eight Thousand only), as a prudent course, this Court permits the Respondent/Decree holder to receive the said amount of Rs. 97,000/- (Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand only) 5 from the Executing Court viz., learned Sub-Judge, Paramakudi in E.P. No. 3 of 2010 and for the balance of Rs. 11,000/-(Rupees Eleven Thousand only) together with subsequent interest to be paid by the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation, liberty is given to the Respondent/Decree holder to institute a fresh E.P in the manner known to law. The Respondent/Petitioner/Decree holder is permitted to file necessary payment out application as per Rules 161 and 162 of CPC and the Executing Court viz., the learned Sub-Judge, Paramakudi is directed to disburse the said amount of Rs. 97,000/-(Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand only) to the Respondent, of course, after providing necessary opportunity to the Revision Petitioner/Transport Corporation.
With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2010 is closed.