C. HARI SHANKAR
Goyal Mg Gases Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Neelachal Ispat Nigam Limited (ninl) And Another – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. execution of arbitral award (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. impact of legislative amendments on arbitral proceedings (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. nature of agreements between mmtc and ninl (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. dispute over debt claims (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 41 , 43 , 46) |
| 5. criteria for attachment of debt under order xxi (Para 54 , 96 , 100) |
| 6. dismissal of execution petition (Para 110 , 111) |
JUDGMENT
EX.aPPL.(OS) 607/2021
1. The precise scope of Order XXI Rule 46(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the concept of 'debt' within its meaning, the extent of the onus on the judgement debtor who seeks to invoke the provision, and the position, in law, in a situation in which the garnishee disputes the debt of which the judgement-debtor seeks attachment, are seminal issues which arise for consideration in this application.
46. attachment of debt, share and other property not in possession of judgment-debtor. -
(1) In the case of -
(a) a debt not secured by a negotiable instrument,
(b) a share in the capital of a corporation,
(c) other movable property not in the possession of the judgment-debtor, except property deposited in, or in the custody of, any Court, the attachment shall
State of West Bengal vs. B.K. Mondal AIR 1962 SC 779
SundaramFinance Limited v.Abdul Samad (2018) 3 SCC 622
UoI vs. Karan Chand Thapar (2004) 3 SCC 504
Vali Ram vs. SatwantiKaur 1983 5 DRJ 259
Shanti Prasad vs. Director of Enforcement AIR 1962 SC 1764
AddepalliSatyanarayanamurthy vs. VadlamannatiVenkateswararao AIR 1937 Mad 848
Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd vs. BishalJaiswal (2021) 6 SCC 366
Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Kochi Cricket Pvt Ltd (2018) 6 SCC 287
Mackinnon Mackenzie and Company Pvt Ltd vs. Anil Kumar Sen AIR 1975 Cal 150
Kurseong Hydro-Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. Lakshmi Narayan Sukhani
HyderabadCoop. Commercial Corpn Ltd vs. Syed Mohiuddin Kadir (1975) 2 SCC 624
Hindustan Construction Co Ltd. vs. UOI (2020) 17 SCC 324
General Electric Co. vs. Renusagar Power Co. (1987) 4 SCC 137
Fargo Freight Ltd vs. Commodities Exchange Corporation 2004 7 SCC 203
The attachment does not create any charge on the attached property, and the garnishee does not become a surety under Section 145 CPC by virtue of the prohibitory order issued under Order 21 Rule 46 C....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the Court's authority to attach a debt, hold a garnishee liable, and order deposit of the amount for satisfaction of the decree under Order 21 Rule....
Garnishee orders attach only debts existing at the time of service, excluding subsequent amounts credited to the debtor's account, affirming the principle of freezing the amount as of the order's ser....
Attachment must comply with jurisdictional rules; absence qualifies as an irregularity, not an automatic nullity unless substantial injury is proven.
A garnishee order requires the Judgment Creditor to prove the indebtedness of the garnishee to the Judgment Debtor; failure to provide sufficient evidence invalidates the order.
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.