Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/1792/2025dismissed

V.Murugesan v. S.Radhakrishnan

2025-07-03Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.07.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and C.M.P.(MD).No.9792 of 2025 V.Murugesan

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.S.Radhakrishnan KVasudeva Maniakkaran (Died on 2302.2020) 2.V.Karunakaran 3.V.Parthiban 4.E.Nivedhitha 5.Madhivadhani 6.Uma Mahewari 7.Anusya

...Respondents

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order of the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dated 18.04.2024 made in E.P.No.89 of 2017 in Arbitration Case No.4 of 2015 on the file of the Sole Arbitrator, Chennai. 1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji * * * * *

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking orders to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, dated 18.04.2024 in E.P.No.89 of 2017 in Arbitration Case No. 4 of 2015 on the file of the Sole Arbitrator, Chennai.

2. The petitioner is the second respondent in Arbitration Case No.4 of 2015 before the Sole Arbitrator, Chennai. The first respondent herein is the decree holder. Pursuant to the arbitral award, the first respondent filed Execution Petition in E.P.No.89 of 2017 before the learned Principal District Judge, Trichirappalli, and the same was ordered on 18.04.2024.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the copy of the arbitral award was not furnished to him, thereby preventing him from exercising his right to file an appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before the appropriate forum.

4. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the respondents, notice to the respondents is dispensed with. 2/4

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy available under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 03.07.2025 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No TSG To 1.The Principal District Judge, Trichirappalli. 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

3/4

M.DHANDAPANI , J.

TSG 03.07.2025 4/4