The main legal point established in the judgment is the wide scope of Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and the complementary nature of inherent powers to the specifically conferred powers. The judgment also emphasizes the need to follow statutory and judicial mandates, such as the mandatory pre-deposit requirement under the MSME Act, 2006.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

I.A No. 22022/2022 (under Section 151 CPC)

1. The instant application under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter "CPC") has been filed on behalf of applicant/respondent seeking the following reliefs: a. Direct the release of the entire deposited amount of Rs. 3,76,84,360/- with the registry of this Hon'ble Court in favour of the respondent. b. Pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit & proper in the interest of justice.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The learned Arbitrator has passed the Award dated 22nd April 2019 granting an amount of Rs. 3, 11, 90,000/- along with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of cancellation of the Contract continuing till realization and which was required to be paid within a period of 90 days from the date of Award i.e. 22nd April 2019, failing which interest @ 18% per annum is to be applicable after the expiry of 90 days of the Award.

3. The non-applicant/petitioner herein filed the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter "the Act, 1996") to challenge the Award dated 22nd April 2019, which was dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05th December 2022, being devoid of merits.

4. A Coordinate Bench of this Court passed an order dated 11th December 2019, thereby directing the non-applicant/petitioner to deposit the entire arbitral amount along with interest in terms of the subject Award. In furtherance of the same, the non-applicant/petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 3,11,90,000/- along with a sum of Rs. 64,94,360/- in total amounting to Rs. 3,76,84,360/- towards interest, in favor of the Registrar General of this Court.

5. During the pendency of the petition under Section 34 of the Act, 1996, the applicant/respondent filed an Application bearing IA No. 3906/2021 seeking the release of the above stated deposited amount in favour of the applicant/respondent. The Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 12th March 2021 allowed the above stated Application and directed the Registrar General to release the sum of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- in favour of the applicant/respondent herein, against security, subject to the satisfaction of the Registrar General and is pending for verification by the Registrar General.

SUBMISSIONS

(on behalf of applicant/respondent)

6. Learned counsel for the applicant/respondent submitted that during the pendency of the petition to challenge the Award, the applicant/respondent filed an Application bearing IA No. 3906/2021 seeking the release of the abovestated deposited amount in favor of the applicant/respondent and the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 12th March 2021 allowed the abovestated Application directing the Registrar General to release a sum of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- in favor of the applicant/respondent herein, against the security of the property subject to the satisfaction of the Registrar General.

7. It is submitted that the applicant/respondent has already submitted a security which is taken into consideration by this Court in its order dated 12th April 2021, but the same was directed to be verified by the Registrar General. It is submitted that the abovestated security could not be verified by the Registrar General. It is further contended that the issue of the release of the deposited amount was kept in abeyance and to date the respondent has not received the amount.

8. It is argued by the learned counsel on behalf of the applicant/respondent that in the meanwhile, the petition challenging the Award was heard and dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in O.M.P (COMM) 372/2019 vide order dated 05th December 2012. The same has not been challenged by the non-applicant/petitioner.

9. It is further submitted on behalf of the applicant/respondent that the respondent is an MSME enterprise. The respondent has been facing financial crisis and is on the verge of collapse hence, the respondent is in dire