M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN tills writ application the petitioner who is the Judgment debtor has challenged the order dated 31.7.2004 passed by the Subordinate Judge -1, Palamau at Daltonganj in Execution Case No. 17 of 1995 directing the petitioner to refund the decreed amount received by him together with interest @ 12% p.a.
(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that. there is no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure which empowers the Court below to award interest on the decreetal amount, that too @ 12% p.a. It appears that the respondent Food Corporation of India filed a Money Suit No. 18/82 for a decree for recovery of the amount of loss sustained by the Corporation. Since the arbitration proceeding was pending, the suit was stayed an ultimately the arbitrator allowed the claim of petitioner to the extent of Rs. 74,460.22/ - The award was made of the Court and a decree was passed by the Court below. The respondent preferred appeal being Miscellaneous Appeal No - 42 of 1995 before this Court. Meanwhile petitioner executed the decree in Execution Case No. 17/1995, in the appeal on the application filed by the petitioner the execution of the decree was stayed subject to deposit of the decreetal amount by the Judgment -debtor. The decree -holder was also given liberty to withdraw the amount. Eventually the appeal Filed before this Court was allowed and the decree and award was set aside. The respondents thereafter filed application in the Executing Court for a direction to the judgment -debtor refund the decreetal amount so paid to the petitioner. The Court below after hearing the parties directed the petitioner to refund the decreetal amount and also pay interest @ 12% p.a.
(3.) ALTHOUGH a separate proceeding under Section 144. Code of Civil Procedure was not initiated by the respondents but the impugned order was passed on the application filed by the respondents directing the petitioner decree -holder to refund the amount together with interest.;