PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. BOC PROPERTIES PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this order, I shall dispose of the application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC preferred by the applicant/defendant for setting aside the decree dated 8th April, 1999 making the award dated 1st November 1996 as a rule of the Court.

(2.) BRIEF facts relevant for purpose of deciding this application are that the award was filed in the Court by the learned arbitrator and the same was registered as Suit No.2825A of 1996. Notice of award was sent to both the parties by the Court. The notice sent to defendant came back unserved. As the efforts to serve applicant/defendant through ordinary course failed, the respondent was served through publication in "Times of India" Delhi edition. Applicant/defendant was also served through affixation. After defendant was served through publication and affixation, still defendant did not appear and this Court vide order dated 8th April, 1999 made the award a rule of the Court and passed a decree in terms of the award granting pendent lite and future interest @ 10% per annum from the date of decree till realization. The present application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC was made by defendant on 7th May, 2003 wherein defendant took the plea that defendant learnt about the decree when certain recovery proceedings were initiated by decree holder/plaintiff and a notice was served by the Recovery Officer on defendant for recovery of the amount. Defendant then inspected the record of recovery officer, however, the related documents were not found by the defendant/judgment debtor and then he made more efforts and again carried out inspection and came to know that recovery proceedings were initiated on the basis of an award which was made rule of the Court.

(3.) IN reply to this application, it is submitted by non applicant/plaintiff /decree holder that the averments made by the applicant were false. The recovery notice was issued by Debt Recovery Tribunal-I for a sum of Rs. 1,18,33,654/- being the decreetal amount due against the judgment debtor/applicant under the decree. However, the applicant was aware of passing of the award as well as of the decree passed by the Court, but the applicant had been deliberately not appearing in the Court. The applicant was given several opportunities by the learned arbitrator. Even before the arbitrator, the conduct of the applicant had been of defiance and not to appear. In the Court also applicant adopted the same attitude.