SUBBRAYA Vs. S CDCC BANK LIMITED UDUPI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Even though the matter is listed for preliminary hearing, with consent, it is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) Aggrieved by the award passed by the Arbitrator, the Petitioner is before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the KAT'). The main case of the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority is that he is only a guarantor, hence the question of his satisfying the award passed against the Respondents 3 and 4 does not arise. It is to be noticed that the appeal was filed in the year 2005 and the matter was posted for arguments on 5-3-2010, but, however, there was no representation by the Petitioner or his Counsel and Respondents 3 and 4 also could not attend the case, hence the said appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Immediately thereafter the Petitioner filed an application for restoration of the said appeal. The Petitioner also maintains an application for interim stay. The Tribunal has issued notice on the Misc. Petition as well as on the application. In the meantime, the property of the Petitioner is brought to sale pursuant to a notification dated 16-4-2010, copy of which is produced at Annexure-J to the petition, indicating the scheduled auction to take place on 24-4-2010.

(3.) Mr. Achar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that since the Petitioner is only a guarantor, the question of his satisfying the award amount does not arise. He further submits that since the Misc. Petition and the application is still pending consideration, the interim order is essential.