Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR
Paharpur Cooling Towers Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sinnar Thermal Power Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, A&C Act, read with Order XXI Rules 10 and 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking enforcement of the Arbitral Award dated 12.11.2021, read with the correction Order dated 20.12.2021, Arbitral Award, against all the Judgment Debtors herein. In furtherance of the said enforcement, the Petitioner has accordingly formulated multiple prayers in the present petition.
BRIEF FACTS:
2. For the purposes of adjudication of the present lis, it is necessary to briefly set out the relevant factual background, insofar as it bears upon the controversy presently arising for consideration before this Court, which is delineated hereunder:
I. The Decree Holder was awarded a Letter of Award dated 12.08.2010, whereby it was entrusted with the work of construction, erection, commissioning and completion of five Induced Draft Cooling Towers for a thermal power project situated at Nashik, Maharashtra.
II. Pursuant thereto, a series of contracts came to be executed governing the said scope of works.
III. At the time of execution of the aforesaid Letter of Award
Once a resolution plan is approved under the IBC, all claims not part of the plan are extinguished, and the tribunal lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate on such claims.
The approved resolution plan under the IBC extinguishes claims not included, rendering any arbitral award related to such claims non-executable.
Parties challenging an arbitral award must do so exclusively under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act; raising new grounds or objections in execution proceedings is impermissible.
IBC is a time bound process – Plea of not being aware of newspaper pronouncements is not one which should be available to a commercial party.
The court lacks jurisdiction to entertain execution applications against dissolved entities; disputes of fraud must be resolved by NCLT as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The court held that upon approval of the resolution plan under the IBC, all pending claims not included in the plan stand extinguished, thus protecting the successful resolution applicant from any un....
Execution proceedings require proper pleadings to challenge maintainability; beneficial ownership must be established for enforcement of an arbitral award.
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
