SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 14894

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA, J
MANBHUPINDER SINGH ATWAL S/O LATE BARINDER SINGH ATWAL – Appellant
Versus
NEERAJ KUMARPAL SHAH – Respondent
C/ARBI.P/110/2022



Petitioner Advocates:MR.PARTH CONTRACTOR(7150) ,Respondent Advocate: MR HIMANSHU C DESAI(6832)

The court has jurisdiction to compel a judgment debtor to disclose assets under the CPC to ensure compliance with an arbitration award.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 5(1) - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order 21, Rule 41 - Disclosure of assets - The court directed the respondent to file an affidavit disclosing movable and immovable properties to satisfy the arbitration award, emphasizing the necessity of such disclosure in the absence of credible grounds for fear of dissipation. (Paras 2, 3, 5)

(B) Jurisdiction of Court - The court clarified that it has the authority to compel a judgment debtor to disclose assets under the CPC when necessary for the execution of a decree. (Paras 3.1, 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed an application to compel the judgment debtor to disclose assets in light of an arbitration award, while the respondent contested the necessity of such disclosure without credible grounds.

Findings of Court:
The court found it appropriate to require the respondent to disclose assets to ensure compliance with the arbitration award.

Issues: The main issues were whether the court could compel asset disclosure without credible grounds and the interpretation of relevant provisions of the CPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that it has the jurisdiction to order asset disclosure under the CPC to ensure the enforcement of arbitration awards, even in the absence of explicit grounds for concern.

Result: The respondent was directed to file an affidavit disclosing assets.

ORDER

1. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.S.N.Soparkar appearing for the respondent has tendered the preliminary affidavit-in-reply on behalf of the respondent in Civil Application No. 1 of 2023 in Civil Application No. 1 of 2022 in Arbitration Petition No. 110 of 2022. The same is ordered to be taken on record.

2. Referring to the orders passed by the authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the order dated 20th October, 2023 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No.18654 of 2023, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Soparkar has made statement at bar as under:-

    “That by virtue of 3rd proviso below Sub section (1) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act read with Order dated 20th October, 2023 passed by this Hon’ble Court, according to respondent- Shri Neeraj Kumarpal Shah, the attachement order passed by the Prevention of Money Laundering Act continues to be in force.”

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Kamal Trivedi appearing for the petitioner in Arbitration Petition No. 110 of 2022 has submitted that as one of the property of the another judgement debtor is situated at Mumbai, the petitioner has filed Interim Application No.1390 of 2022 in Commercial Execution Application No. 23308 of 2021 wherein, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has directed the judgement debtor to file an affidavit on oath disclosing all his assets movable as well as immovable.

3.1 It was further submitted that as per provisions of Rule 41 read with Rule 11, 12A, 13 of Order 21 the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short “the CPC”], this Court can direct the judgement debtor to disclose on oath, the movable and immovable properties so that it can be decided whether such property is required to be attached during the pendency of the execution petition or not.

Rule 41(1) of Order 21 of the Code reads as under :

    “41. Examination of judgment-debtor as to his property. — (1) Where a decree is for the payment of money the decree-holder may apply to the Court for an order that — (a) the judgment-debtor, or (b) any officer thereof, or (c) any other person. be orally examined as to whether any or what debts are owing to the judgment debtor and whether the judgment-debtor has any and what other property or means of satisfying the decree; and the Court may make an order for the attendance and examination of such judgmentdebtor, or officer or other person and for the production of any books or documents.”

4. On the other hand, Mr. S.N.Soparkar, learned Sr.Advocate for the respondent has submitted as under :-

    “That there is no provision of law under which the judgement debtor can be called upon to make disclosure about his assets and that too without there being credible ground for the alleged fear of dissipation of the property, to make disclosure of his assets.”

5. Considering the above submissions and looking to the manner in which, the matter has proceeded before this Court, the respondent is directed to file an affidavit disclosing the list of properties movable or immovable properties for satisfying the arbitration award which is decreed for which this petition is filed, within a period of two weeks from today.

6. Civil Applications along with Arbitration Petition No.110 of 2022 is kept for further orders on receipt of the aforesaid affidavit.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top