DIDDI KUMARASWAMY Vs. PATHAKALA BHASKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner filed EP No. 92 of 2005, in the Court of District Judge, warangal, for execution of a Settlement-cum-Award, dated 9. 10. 2002, said to have been rendered in an Arbitration, between himself and the respondents. It was pleaded that the father of the respondent No. 1 borrowed a sum of Rs. 14,000/-from the petitioner on 10. 6. 1993, and agreed to sell the house bearing No. 15-189/2, Narsampet, at the price that may be fixed by the elders. Possession was also said to have been delivered to the petitioner. It is stated that an agreement was executed by the father of the 1st respondent, stipulating the consideration for the property, at Rs. 60,000/- and adjusting the amount of rs. 14,000/-, together with the accrued interest, amounting to about Rs. 40,000/ -. The petitioner alleged that when he offered to pay the balance of Rs. 19,960/-, the 1st respondent and his father refused to receive it, and that there upon the matter was referred to Arbitrators. The petitioner prayed for enforcement of the Settlement-cum-Award, dated 9. 10. 2002.

(2.) THE 1st respondent opposed the EP, denying the very existence of award, as well as the agreement, pleaded by the petitioner. The District Court dismissed the EP, observing that the petitioner approached it, on an earlier occasion, by filing EP. No. 59 of 2003, for enforcement of that very award and that the same was dismissed. It was also observed that the petitioner himself is not sure, as to whether the one, sought to be enforced, is an award or settlement, and that there is nothing on record to disclose that the alleged dispute between the parties was referred to Arbitrators. The said order is challenged in this CRP.

(3.) SRI B. Harinath Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the award, dated 9. 10. 2002, is binding on the parties and that the District Court was not justified in rejecting the EP. He contends that the earlier EP was dismissed with certain objections, and no decision was rendered, on merits. Learned counsel submits that on account of the rejection of the EP, the very institution of the proceedings, before Arbitrators, was defeated.