Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Arvind Kumar Bansal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitral award deposited in high court during section 34 challenge. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. parties dispute order 21 rule 1(2) cpc compliance via court deposit. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. precedents hold court deposit constitutes payment to decree-holder. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. interest ceases on deposit; execution quashed as arbitration act prevails. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present petition arises out of the order as passed by the Learned District Judge, Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P dated 01.04.2025, whereby the objections as preferred by the JD/present petitioner were ordered to be dismissed.
2. The facts of the case are that the arbitration proceedings commenced between the parties and an award was passed by the sole member of the Arbitrator Tribunal Mr. Satish Sagar. The Arbitrator vide its award dated 10.08.2018 allowed the claim petition as preferred by the DH/respondent and award amounting to Rs.75,22,300/- was passed in favour of the respondent and against the present petitioner to be paid within a period of 90 days from the date of award and it was further ordered that in case of failure on the part of the respondent/p
Court deposit of arbitral award amount with interest during Section 34 stay proceedings constitutes payment to decree-holder's credit, ceasing post-award interest from deposit date; Order XXI Rule 1(....
Interest ceased to run on the deposited amount after the dismissal of FAO No. 284/2005 on 04.12.2008.
Payment recognized under decree requires unconditional compliance; bank guarantees do not suffice, and interest continues until funds are available to the decree holder.
The court affirmed its jurisdiction to review its orders while highlighting that a mere filing of a review petition does not grant a stay on award enforcement unless complying with statutory requirem....
Interest on decreed amounts will not cease upon deposit in a court other than the executing court; actual payment to the decree holder is required to stop interest accrual.
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 pendency of an application under Section 34 of the A&C Act is no longer a bar for enforcement of an arbitral award. The court must hear the application under Section 34 of the A&C Act on its meri....
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
