Back
ORISSA HIGH COURT
UNION OF INDIA GENERAL MANAGER EAST COAST RAILWAY BBSR – Appellant
Versus
M/S RASHMI METALIKS LTD. WEST BENGAL – Respondent
Judgment :
Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India calling in question the order dated 02.09.2025 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge (Commercial Court), Bhubaneswar, in Arbitration Petition No.9 of 2024. By the impugned order, the learned Commercial Court disposed of the Petitioner’s application filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and while granting a stay of operation of the arbitral award dated 08.11.2023, made the same conditional upon deposit of 100% of the awarded amount. The Petitioner assails the said order to the extent it imposes such onerous and unconditional pre-deposit as a prerequisite for stay, contending that the condition is excessive, disproportionate, and not in consonance with the settled principles governing exercise of discretion under Section 36 of the Act
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE
2. The record discloses that, in terms of the Railway Board letter dated 12.03.2007, Rashmi Metalliks Limited was accorded approval to procure 305 BOXN-HS wagons, constituting five rakes, under the Wagon Investment Scheme, 2005. The permission was granted subje
The court emphasized that allegations of fraud affecting an arbitral award mandate an unconditional stay pending challenge proceedings, requiring careful judicial evaluation of procedural adherence.
Arbitration Award – Execution - By virtue of the provisions of Section 36, since it is a money decree and the Code of Civil Procedure in Order XLI Rule 1(3) mandates imposition of the terms and condi....
The recent amendment to Section 36 of the Arbitration Act and the application of the Interest Act in justifying the grant of interest commensurate with the current rate of interest being granted by t....
An unconditional stay of an arbitral award is impermissible unless specific statutory conditions under Section 36(3) of the Arbitration Act are fulfilled.
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....
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a prima facie case for fraud under the second proviso to section 36(3) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the in....
The limited scope of interference under Section 34 of the A&C Act of 1996 and the requirement for an arbitral award to be suffering from patent illegality for it to be set aside.
(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
