Telangana High Court
WP/9309/2007 of D.Jaya Raju, Vs The Property Association of baptist Chruches Pvt.Ltd., on 31 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS WRIT PETITION No.9309 OF 2007 ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu) This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorari declaring the Award, dated 05.02.2005, of the Lok Adalat at Nellore in O.S.No.39 of
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUANDTHE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.9309 OF 2007
ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)
This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarideclaring the Award, dated 05.02.2005, of the Lok Adalat at Nellore inO.S.No.39 of 2004 on the file of the District Judge, Nellore andconsequential orders thereto as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Respondent No.2 herein/plaintiff filed the aforementioned suitagainst respondent No.1 herein/defendant for specific performance ofAgreement of sale, dated 21.11.2006, executed by the defendant infavour of the plaintiff for Rs.50.00 lakhs and the same was settledbefore the Lok Adalat at Nellore on 05.02.2005 and an Award waspassed in terms of the compromise. Petitioner herein, who is a thirdparty to the Award, filed the present writ petition challenging the saidAward.
3. Heard.
4. There cannot be any dispute that an Award passed underSection 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 would be finaland it cannot be challenged. However, law is well settled that theparty to the Award can challenge the Award on the ground of fraud ormisrepresentation in obtaining the Award. Admittedly, the petitioner isnot a party to the Award. The contention of the learned counsel for thepetitioner is that in respect of the property in question, the petitionerand four others filed a suit vide C.S.No.124 of 1994 before the HighCourt of Judicature of Madras and hence, the Award cannot beenforced against the petitioner, as the dispute relating to the propertyin question is yet to be decided by the said Court. Since the petitioner is not a party to the Award, it does not bind the petitioner and it cannotbe enforced against him. It will not have any effect on theaforementioned suit filed by him. Therefore, the Writ Petition is liableto be dismissed.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed with a liberty to thepetitioner to avail the remedies available to him under law. There shallbe no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in thisWrit Petition shall stand closed.
______________________
JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
_______________
JUSTICE ANIS
Date: 31.12.2014
AMD
214
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUAND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.9309 OF 2007
DATE: 31.12.2014
AMD