Commercial Courts are empowered to execute arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, reaffirming the intent of the Commercial Courts Act for speedy resolution of commercial disputes.

ORDER :

(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)

The petitioner/judgment debtor is at the doors of this Court calling in question an order dated 07-03-2025 passed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge (Dedicated Commercial Court), Bengaluru in Commercial Execution Petition No.180 of 2024 holding that the commercial execution petition is maintainable before the concerned Court.

2. Heard Sri K.G. Raghavan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Dhananjay V.Joshi, learned senior counsel along with Sri C. Chetan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/caveator.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

A term sheet comes to be executed between the petitioner and Global India Holdings Private Limited for acquisition of an educational institution operated by the petitioner in Bengaluru along with all its assets and liabilities. Pursuant to the drawal of term sheet, an agreement to sell is executed between the petitioner and the respondent for sale of 29 school buses for a total consideration of Rs.2,70,00,000/- with an initial deposit of Rs.2.50 crores paid by the respondent to the petitioner. The agreement to sell was terminated by the respondent and alleging unilateral termination, the petitioner is said to have issued notice invoking arbitration clause as found in the agreement to sell. The arbitration proceedings are continued. An arbitral award is passed on 19-11-2019 directing the petitioner to refund Rs.2.50 crores along with applicable interest. Challenging the arbitral award, the petitioner files proceedings invoking Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘the 1996 Act’ for short) before the High Court of Delhi in O.M.P.(COMM) No.391 of 2020. The High Court of Delhi is said to have allowed Section 34 petition and sets aside the arbitral award. At the instance of parties, a fresh Arbitral Tribunal is constituted on the day the High Court allowed Section 34 petition. Thereafter arbitration proceedings are held and the impugned arbitral award is passed by the newly constituted Arbitral Tribunal again directing refund of Rs.2.50 crores, interest of Rs.4,01,05,479.45, future interest of Rs.1,05,63,141.08 and costs of Rs.7,22,813/- aggregating to Rs.7,63,91,433.53/-. The petitioner again institutes proceedings invoking Section 34 of the 1996 Act before the High Court of Delhi challenging the later Arbitral Award in O.M.P. (COMM) No.243 of 2023 along with an application seeking stay of operation of impugned arbitral award.

4. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the respondent files an application before the High Court of Delhi seeking a direction to the petitioner to deposit the award amount. No order is passed on the said application. During the pendency of proceedings before the High Court of Delhi, the respondent institutes impugned proceedings before concerned Court at Bengaluru seeking execution of arbitral award. On receipt of notice, it appears, the petitioner files objections questioning jurisdiction and maintainability of impugned execution proceedings. The respondent then files an application in the execution proceedings seeking disclosure of assets both movable and immovables owned or held by the petitioner. The concerned Court by the impugned order dated 07-03-2025, holds that the execution petition filed by the respondent in lieu of arbitral award is maintainable and directs production of assets and liabilities statement as sought. Feeling aggrieved by the action of the concerned Court in entertaining the execution petition, the p