The NEEPCO, while recognized as a 'State' under Article 12, does not equate to 'Government' for Section 82 CPC applicability, requiring careful judicial interpretation of its execution context.

JUDGMENT

W. Diengdoh, J. - On order dated 26.05.2023 passed by the learned Commercial Court, East Khasi Hills, Shillong in Commercial Arbitration Execution Case No. 4 of 2018 is under scrutiny in these proceedings brought about by the filing of an application under Article 227 by the petitioner herein.

2. Heard Mr. T.T. Diengdoh, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner, who has led this Court to the background of the case leading to the passing of the impugned order aforesaid, which runs as follows:

2.1. That on 25.03.2009, the respondent/NEEPCO had invited bids for the Pare Hydro-electric Project located at Papumpare District in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner/Company having submitted its bid for the same, a Letter of Intent (LOI) was issued by NEEPCO Ltd. for a contract between the parties for the said project said to be for a period of 36 months. Accordingly, the Work Order was issued to the petitioner who has accepted the same.

2.2. In course of the work on the said project, dispute arose between the parties and the same not being able to be solved amicably, the arbitration clause was invoked and the matter was then referred a sole Arbitrator, Mr. N.N. Singhal.

2.3. After the Arbitrator had concluded the arbitral proceedings, an award dated 15.09.2015 was passed in favour of the petitioner/Company for a sum of ? 23,12,10,513/- along with interest @ 13.5% pa (pre Award) and a further 15% pa (post Award) till the date of the actual payment.

2.4. The respondent/NEEPCO, being aggrieved by the said Award, has then approached the competent court of jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the same was eventually numbered as Commercial Arbitration Case No. 4 of 2018.

2.5. In the meantime, the petitioner filed Execution Petition for execution of the said Award. The application was filed under Order XXI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2.6. Again, the petition under Section 34 of the said Arbitration Act was dismissed by the Commercial Court which led to the filing of an appeal before this Court under Section 37 of the said Act by the respondent/NEEPCO.

2.7. The appeal registered as Arbitration Appeal No. 1 of 2022 was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.04.2023, whereby the prayer of the respondent/NEEPCO was rejected and the original Award was left untouched, except for the fact that the pre-award interest has not been allowed.

2.8. The petitioner filed an appropriate application before the Execution Court for satisfaction of the Award in terms of the judgment and order passed by this Court on 26.04.2023.

2.9. The respondent/NEEPCO then filed an application/petition under Section 151 CPC with a prayer for grant of time to approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court with a Special Leave Petition against the said judgment and order dated 26.04.2023 an