SRI ARUN KUMAR JINDAL Vs. RAJNI PODDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the instant revision is the order no. 39 dtd. 11/1/2022 passed by Ld. Additional District Judge, 6th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas wherein the application filed at the behest of the petitioner under Sec. 47 of the Code of the Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CPC) was dismissed.

(2.) The fact of the case in a nutshell is to the effect that one Radha Krishan Poddar, the predecessor in-interest of the decree holder had instituted an execution proceeding which was registered as Execution Case no. 9 of 2002 in order to execute the award dtd. 22/12/2001 passed in the arbitral proceedings. But, on 24/8/2014 the original award holder passed away and the opposite parties herein being the legal heirs of the original award holder were substituted by the Court vide order dtd. 30/10/2014. But, later on in the year 2018 the opposite parties became aware of the fact that the Ld. Civil Judge has no jurisdiction and accordingly withdrew the proceeding and filed an execution proceeding afresh being arbitration execution case no. 535 of 2018 for execution of the arbitral award dtd. 22/12/2001 before the Ld. District Judge, Alipore who, in turn, transferred the same to the Ld. Additional District Judge, 15th Court, Alipore which was again subsequently transferred to the Ld. Additional District Judge, 6th Court, Alipore.

(3.) During pendency of such execution proceeding the decree holder took out an application under Order 21 Rule 37 & 38 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC. Upon obtaining notice of the same the petitioners filed an application under Sec. 47 of the CPC, thereby questioning the execution of the said decree. But the Ld. Executing Court vide its impugned order dismissed the application preferred by the petitioners on the ground that there was no scope for the executing Court to go beyond the decree. Hence, the interference of this Court is sought for.