SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Del) 2345

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
J.R. MIDHA, J.
M/s Medico Abroad - Decree Holder
Versus
M/s ISM Focal Point - Judgment Debtor
EX.P. 440 of 2014 with R.P. 248 of 2016, Ex. APPL.(OS) 203 of 2017 & Crl.M.A.7449 of 2017
Decided On : 29-08-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Decree Holder : Mr. Soumik Ghosal with Mr. Gaurav Singh
For the Judgment Debtor : Mr. Suprabh Kumar Roshan

The main legal point established is that an execution petition is not maintainable if objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act are pending, and jurisdiction is a crucial factor in determining the validity of an execution petition.

Headnote:

Execution Petition - Arbitration Award - Arbitration and Conciliation Act - Section 34 - Section 36 - Section 42

Fact of the Case:

The decree holder filed an Execution Petition against the judgment debtor to seek execution of an arbitration award. The judgment debtor claimed to have no properties in India and filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The court dismissed the execution petition due to lack of jurisdiction and pending objections under Section 34.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the execution petition was not maintainable due to the pending objections under Section 34 and lack of jurisdiction. The court dismissed the review petition and allowed the decree holder to initiate execution proceedings after the decision of the objections under Section 34.

Issues: Jurisdiction, Maintainability of Execution Petition, Validity of Objections under Section 34

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the execution petition was not maintainable due to the pending objections under Section 34 and lack of jurisdiction. The court also emphasized the need to follow the legal process and initiate execution proceedings after the decision of the objections under Section 34.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the review petition and allowed the decree holder to initiate execution proceedings after the decision of the objections under Section 34. The court also dismissed the application against the decree holder under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

1. The decree holder filed the Execution Petition 440/2014 against the judgment debtor to seek execution of the arbitration award dated 18th December, 2010 in which the learned Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs.69,57,720/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum to the decree holder.

2. The decree holder stated in the execution petition that the judgment debtor has an office at C-93, Anand Niketan, Dolapur, New Delhi and the decree be executed by attachment/sale of the movable properties of the judgment debtor mentioned in Annexure -A2, namely computers, air conditioners, steel almirahs, tables, chairs, coolers or any other articles lying at the residence of the judgment debtor at C-93, Anand Niketan, Dolapur, New Delhi and J-116, Rajaji Gardens, New Delhi-110027. Along with the petition, the decree holder filed an affidavit of V. Narahari (Annexure-A3), in which it was stated that the judgment debtor has offices at C-93, Anand Niketan, Dolapur New Delhi and J-116, Rajaji Gardens, New Delhi-110027.

3. On 14th January, 2015, the notice was issued to the judgment debtor who filed an affidavit dated 14th September, 2015 stating that the judgment debtor is a permanent resident of Kyrgyzstan and has no immovable or movable properties or bank account in India. The judgment debtor further stated that the address given in the execution petition is the old address of Kyrgyzstan Embassy. The judgment debtor further stated that the judgment debtor has filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act against the ex parte award before the City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Relevant portion of the affidavit of the judgment debtor is reproduced hereunder:-

“I, Mr. Phani bhushan Potu, S/o Raghava Rao Potu, aged about 40 yrs, R/o 89/1, Turusbekova Street, Bishkek City, Kyrgyzstan, temporarily came down to Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath and submit as under:

1. I submit I am the deponent herein and JDR in the above E.P, as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. I am filing this affidavit to comply with the orders dated 14.1.2015 passed by this Hon’ble Court, declaring that I have no movable or immovable properties in my name and I have no bank account also in my name in India.

2. I submit that I am working as Vice-Dean for International School of Medicine of International University of Kyrgyzstan and I am a permanent resident of Kyrgyzstan. I submit that I am a resident of No. 89/1, Turusbekova Street, Bishkek City, Kyrgyzstan.

3. I submit that the address shown in the E.P was the old address of Kyrgyzstan Embassy and later it shifted to No.78, Poorvi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The DHR served the notice in the above E.P. in new address of Kyrgyzstan embassy.

4. I submit that the DHR obtained the exparte award by showing wrong address and filed the present E.P also with the same address and he obtained all the exparte orders showing the old Kyrgyzstan Embassy address. The above E.P filed to execute an exparte Award, hence I filed an application to set aside the said exparte decree U/S 34 of Arbitration Act on the file of XI ACJ, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and the same was numbered as O.P.No.790/15.

Therefore, I am most respectfully filing this affidavit to comply with the orders dated 14.1.2015 by this Hon’ble Court declaring the properties Nill in my name in India and I have no bank account also.” (Emphasis supplied)

4. The judgment debtor filed a certificate of the Embassy of Kyrgyz Republic certifying that C-93, Anand Niketan, New Delhi-110021 was the Embassy address and from 2011, it was changed to F-78, Poorvi Marg Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057. The certificate dated 14th April, 2015 is reproduced hereunder:-

“EMBASSY OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

NEW DELHI

APRIL 14, 2015

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

The Embassy of Kyrgyz Republic in India has to inform that from 2011 the official address C-93 Anand Niketan, New Delhi, 110021 was changed to F-78 Poorvi Marg Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, 110057.

Nurzat Omurakunova

Consul on the


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top