(1.) THIS first appeal is filed against the order of the execution court dated 23.3.2011. Though the appeal is titled as FAO, really the appeal will be an EFA in view of the fact that the impugned decision would have been passed under Order 47 CPC. Registry to re -number this appeal as an EFA.
(2.) THE execution court by the impugned order has interpreted the order passed in FAO(OS) 298/1998 by the Division Bench of this Court on 9.10.2009. The Division Bench had reduced interest to 9% per annum simple from 15% per annum simple on the claims which were allowed by the Award and additionally for Claim no.4 which was allowed by the Division Bench in the FAO(OS) No. 298/98 filed by the respondent herein. FAO(OS) 298/1998 was filed by the respondent herein (appellant in the appeal) against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 23.9.1998 accepting the objections of the appellant herein (objector before the learned Single Judge) and by judgment the learned Single Judge had set aside the Award to the extent of Claim no.4 which was allowed by the arbitrator.
(3.) ALL I can say that the pleading as reproduced above in the review application is symptomatic of the competence of few of the advocates who represent governmental authorities such as the Delhi Development Authority and who take very little pain in properly drafting of pleadings. However, a review petition as a whole, and especially para -4 thereof, leaves no manner of doubt that the interest for the entire period at 18% per annum simple was also questioned by the review petitioner (appellant herein) though in the relief clause reference is only to Claim no.4. In any case, this aspect as to whether there existed a specific prayer with respect to reduction of interest to 9% qua all the claims, or was only with respect to Claim no.4, the same will become clear that it was for all claims and not only for Claim no.4 from the order passed in the review petition by the Division Bench on 9.10.2009 and which reads as under: -