HIGH COURT OF DELHI
KLA CONST TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
THE EMBASSY OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF AFGHANISTAN – Respondent
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.)-82/2019
$~11
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Date of decision: 13.09.2021
+
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 82/2019 & EX.APPL.(OS) 901/2021
KLA CONST TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.
..... Decree Holder
Through
Dr.Amit George, Adv. with
Mr.Kartickay Mathur, Mr.K.K.
Shukla & Mr.Shanker Kashyap,
Advs.
versus
THE EMBASSY OF ISLAMIC
REPUBLIC OF AFGHANISTAN
..... Judgement Debtor
Through
Mr.Raghavendra M. Bajaj, Mr.Ejaz
Maqbool, Ms.Garima Bajaj, Mr.Saif
Zia, Mr.Agnish Aditya & Mr.Nikhil
Bamal, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1.
Present execution petition has been filed under Section 36 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act read with Order XXI Rule 11(2) of the
CPC, 1908 on behalf of decree holder seeking enforcement of the arbitral
award dated 26.11.2018.
2.
Decree holder – Ashok Kumar, Authorised Representative of KLA
Const. Technologies Private Limited company and judgment debtor – The
2021:DHC:2831
Embassy of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan had entered into a contract for
the rehabilitation of building of the judgment debtor/Afghan Embassy in
Delhi for a total contract of Rs.3,02,17,066.83 exclusive of taxes.
3.
Pertinently, during execution of work, certain disputes arose between
the parties, for resolution of which decree holder invoked the arbitration
clause in view of the terms and conditions of the work contract, however,
judgment debtor did not respond, therefore, decree holder approached the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India by filing a petition under Section 11 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 being ARB.P. (Civil) No. 14/2014.
4.
Vide order dated 05.01.2015, THE Hon’ble Supreme Court appointed
Shri H.S. Dogra, Director General (Retd.) CPWD sole arbitrator.
Accordingly, decree holder filed its claim of Rs.2,00,47,192.82 along with
pendent lite and future interest before the Arbitrator. Again the judgment
debtor did not join the arbitration proceedings and were accordingly
proceeded ex parte vide order dated 13.11.2017. The learned Arbitrator
partially allowed the claims of the decree holder by passing an award dated
26.11.2018.
5.
During the course of hearing today, learned counsel for the decree
holder submits that an out of court settlement has been arrived at between
2021:DHC:2831
the decree holder and judgment debtor and the terms of settlement are
recorded in the Settlement Agreement dated 11.09.2021 and the present suit
can be decreed in terms thereof. The aforesaid submissions of learned
counsel for the decree holder, is affirmed by the counsel appearing for
judgment debtor.
6.
Though the aforesaid Settlement Agreement dated 11.09.2021, which
is stated to have been filed today vide diary number 755400/2021 in the
Registry, is not on record, however, a hard copy thereof has been produced
before this Court.
7.
The terms of settlement have been enumerated in Para-1.1 to Para-2.5
of the Settlement Agreement. According to the settlement, judgment debtor
toward full and final settlement of all claims and outstanding dues toward
the decree holder under the contract and arbitral award, has issued three
cheques total amounting to Rs.68,00,000/- drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank,
D-10, Nos.1 & 2, Local Shopping Centre, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, details
whereof have been given in Clause 1.1(i) to (iii) of the Settlement
Agreement. Judgment debtor has also agreed to issue an appreciation letter
in favour of decree holder towards successful and satisfactory execution of
the settlement
2021:DHC:2831
8.
In the light of clause 1.2 and 1.3 of the Settlement Agreement dated
11.09.2021, the parties have agreed that the Second Party from their Bank
Account Nos.3111478010, 3111478027 and 3111478041 in Kotak Mahindra
Bank, Branch D Block, New Delhi-110057 will issue cheques from the
aforementioned account and will jointly approach this court to recall its
order dated 23.08.2021.
9