The duty to deliver a signed copy of the arbitral award to each party lies with the arbitrator/arbitral Tribunal, and the decree holder is not obligated to prove compliance of section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act in an execution proceeding under section 36 of the said Act.

JUDGMENT :

NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned advocate for the parties.

2. This petition, filed under article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, takes exception to the order dated 16.08.2019 passed by 11th District Judge, Aurangabad, below Exhibit-1 in Regular Darkhast No. 606/2015.

3. An arbitral award is passed in favour of the petitioner on 09.04.2014 thereby directing the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 74,094/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 03.02.2014 till 31.05.2015 along with future interest till realisation of amount.

4. The petitioner on 24.06.2015 filed Regular Darkhast No. 606/2015 under section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short ‘said Act’) for recovery of amount of Rs. 82,985/- plus future interest. In the said darkhast on 16.08.2019, Executing Court passed following order:

“1. The present execution petition is filed by the decree holder for the execution of the Arbitration Award under section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

2. As per section 34 of the Act the judgment debtor can file an application for setting aside the award. Section 31 of the Act prescribes form and contents of the arbitral award. Sub-Section 5 of section 31 provides that after the award is made a signed copy should be delivered to each party. This provision is made so as to provide an opportunity to the judgment debtor file application to set aside the award. Therefore, it is necessary to see, as to whether the compliance of section 31(5) is made or not. In this respect the learned advocate for the decree holder/decree holder will have to be heard for maintainability of the execution petition in absence of compliance of section 31(5). Hence, following order is passed.

ORDER:

The decree holder/learned advocate for decree holder to satisfy, as to whether there is compliance of section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.”

The petitioner/decree holder is aggrieved by the insistence of the Executing Court that the decree holder should place on record documents showing compliance of section 31(5) of the said Act.

5. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in all the execution proceedings filed under section 36 of said Act, the Executing Courts insist that the decree holder should satisfy that there is compliance of section 31(5) of said Act. Similar such orders passed in other Regular Darkhast No. 1037/2017 are filed along with the petition. By pointing out a copy downloaded from the website of the District Court in Regular Darkhast No. 695/216, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, though the judgment debtor appeared in said proceeding, still the Executing Court is insisting that the decree holder should place on record the documents showing compliance of section 31(5) of the said Act.

6. Attention of this Court is drawn to the order passed by the Executing Court, below Exhibit-1 in Regular Darkhast No. 317/2012, thereby dismissing the said darkhast for not producing evidence of compliance of section 31(5) of the said Act. As the said order is tendered across the bar, the same is marked ‘X’ for identification.

7. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that entire approach on the part of Executing Court in insisting that decree holder should place on record documents showing compliance of section 31(5) of the said Act is unreasonable and the same is not supported by any legal provision. He submits that the impugned order is unsustainable and it may be quashed and set aside.

8. The learned advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3 by placing reliance on the affidavit in reply, supports the impugned order. According to him, ample opportunity is given to the petitioner to show compliance of section 31(5) of the said Act.

9. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner, learned advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader at length. Perused the documents placed on record.

1