Back
RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR
Hooghly River Bridge Commissioners – Appellant
Versus
MBL Infrastructure Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravi Krishan Kapur J.
1. GA/5/2023 is an application filed by the award-holder/petitioner seeking directions on the award debtor/respondent to furnish cash security for a sum of Rs.19,70,98,273/- and also permit withdrawal of the entire deposited amount (including any additional amount) on such terms and conditions as this Court thinks fit and proper.
2. Briefly, the disputes between the parties arise out of a works contract for construction of a multi-storied bus terminus and commercial complex at Serampore, West Bengal. Disputes and differences having arisen between the parties, the award holder was compelled to initiate arbitration proceedings for recovery of their dues. Ultimately, by an award dated 29th June, 2020, a sum of Rs.14.68 crores together with interest thereon was awarded in favour of the petitioner.
3. Being aggrieved by the award, the respondent had filed an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Subsequently, the respondent had also filed an application for stay of the award. By an order dated 16th September, 2021, stay of the award was granted upon the respondent furnishing security for an amount of Rs. 10 crores (half
The court has discretion to modify security arrangements under the Arbitration Act based on changed circumstances, balancing equities between parties while allowing withdrawal of funds.
The court clarified that award debtors must deposit the full awarded sum as a condition for staying enforcement, emphasizing that both public and private parties are subject to the same requirements ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretion of the court to direct the petitioner to furnish security on the full arbitral award and the impact of the Arbitration and Conciliat....
power enshrined under Section 151 of the Code can be exercised if there is no express provision contained in the Code or the Special Act.
The Court held that there is no requirement for a specific statutory provision to allow an award-holder to withdraw the secured amount. Sections 35 read with section 36 of the Act make it clear that ....
The court ruled that a full deposit of the arbitral award amount is mandatory before granting a stay under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
(1) There is no hard and fast rule that application made earlier in point of time must be heard before application made later in point of time.(2) Under Section 36 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
