Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court upheld the attachment of property in execution of an arbitral award, rejecting the third-party claim by Appellant who had purchased the property from the judgment debtor after the arbitral award but before execution proceedings were initiated -- The Court found that the Appellant failed to prove she was a bona fide purchaser without notice of the existing arbitral liability -- The property, though transferred through a registered sale deed dated 23.04.2015, remained liable for execution of the arbitral award dated 11.06.2001 -- The Court emphasized that a post-award purchaser takes the property subject to the award, and the Appellant's close familial relationship with the judgment debtor's management raised suspicions about the transaction's bona fides -- The non-production of the tripartite agreement preceding the sale was considered crucial in determining the absence of collusion -- The executing court and High Court orders were affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed
Headnote
The Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal filed by Appellant against the orders of the executing court and High Court which refused to remove attachment on property purchased by her from the judgment debtor -- The Court held that the Appellant failed to establish herself as a bona fide purchaser without notice of the arbitral award -- The property remained available for execution of the arbitral award dated 11.06.2001 despite the sale deed dated 23.04.2015 -- The principle that a post-award purchaser takes subject to the award was affirmed -- The Appellant's relationship as mother of the Managing Director of the judgment debtor company and non-production of crucial documents weighed against her claim -- The executing court correctly applied Order XXI Rule 58 and Rule 102 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: Whether the Appellant, as a third-party purchaser of property from the judgment debtor after an arbitral award but before execution proceedings, could claim immunity from attachment in execution of the arbitral award
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the orders of the executing court and High Court -- The attachment on the EP Schedule Property for execution of arbitral award dated 11.06.2001 was maintained -- The Appellant's claim as third-party purchaser was rejected
