VIMALA Vs. SHRIRAM CHITS AND INVESTMENTS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above civil revision petition is directed against the fair and decretal order dated 25.10.1995 made in E.A.No. 2899 of 1994 in E.P.No. 2373 of 1993 in A.R.C. No. 907 of 1991 by the Court of IXth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras.

(2.) THE petitioner has filed E.A.No. 2899 of 1994 in the lower Court under Section 47. CPC with averments (i) that the Chit Funds Act does not provide for any arbitration in respect of a claim by the Foreman against the surety; (ii) that the arbitrator has no power to order substituted service for service of notice and the award passed against the petitioner is a nullity; (iii) that the arbitrator has no authority to grant interest in the manner set out in the award; and (iv) that the arbitrator has acted beyond the scope of Section 64 of the Chit Funds Act and hence the award passed against the petitioner is a nullity and inexecutable against her. With the above grounds, the petitioner in the Execution Petition would pray with the lower court to declare that award passed in ARC No. 907 of 1991 by the District Registrar of Chits (North Madras) is a nullity and unexecutable.

(3.) IN this context, the learned counsel would cite a judgment in S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, AIR 1994 SC 853 wherein it is held as follows: "The courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. One who comes to the court, must come with clean hands. It can be said without hesitation that a person whose case is based on falsehood has no right to approach the Court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation. A litigant, who approaches the court, is bound to produce all the documents executed by him which are relevant to the litigation. If the withholds a vital document in order to gain advantage on the other side then he would be guilty of playing fraud on the court as well as on the opposite party."