IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ABHAY AHUJA
Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi S.R.I (formerly known as Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.R.I.) – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Karia – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jva breach triggers discounted share transfer. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. awards upheld enforceable by supreme court. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. rbi impleadment rejected; procedural compliances. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. executability follows enforceability; no re-agitation. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 5. fema compliance mandatory for share transfers. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71) |
| 6. enforcement distinct from execution under cpc. (Para 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84) |
| 7. foreign award enforceability equals executability. (Para 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95) |
| 8. executing court cannot revisit enforceability. (Para 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108) |
| 9. fema allows post-facto rbi permission. (Para 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119) |
| 10. award valuation binding; cpc residuary powers. (Para 120 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125 , |

Vijay Karia and Others v. Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi SRL and Others
Vasudev Dhanjibhai Modi v. Raja bhai Abdul Rehman & Ors.
Rafique Bibi (Dead) by LRs v. Sayed Waliuddin (Dead) by LRs and Ors
Bhavarlal Bhandhari v. Universal Heavy Mechanical Lifting Enterprises
LMJ International Limited v. Sleep well Industries Company Ltd
Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd.
State of Haryana v. State of Punjab & Anr
Karthick Chandra Pal v. Dibakar Bhattacharya
Babu Lal v. M/s. Hazari Lal Kishori Lal & Ors
Shree Ambika Medical Stores & Ors. v. Surat People’s Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Dhurandar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash University
Jai Narain Ram Lundia vs. Kedar Nath Khetan
Union of India v. Vedanta Ltd.
Foreign award enforceable under Sections 48-49 Arbitration Act is executable as decree; no separate executability test or prior RBI approval under FEMA required; prior objections on compliance/valuat....
The enforcement of foreign arbitral awards may only be refused on specific grounds as outlined in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; violations of procedural norms do not themselves constitute a b....
Execution of an arbitral award requires compliance with the 90-day limitation under Section 34; execution petitions filed before this period are impermissible.
Execution of an arbitral award is not maintainable during corporate insolvency proceedings as approved resolution plans render prior claims extinguished.
Execution proceedings require proper pleadings to challenge maintainability; beneficial ownership must be established for enforcement of an arbitral award.
Once an award is found to be enforceable under Section 49, it is deemed to be a decree from the date of the foreign award. Only broader principles of CPC apply to Part II of the Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.