Calcutta High Court
Bagadiya Brothers Singapore Pte. Ltd vs Chamong Tee Exports Private Ltd on 14 January, 2020
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
ORDER SHEET
EC No.655 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
BAGADIYA BROTHERS SINGAPORE PTE. LTD.
Versus
CHAMONG TEE EXPORTS PRIVATE LTD.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
Date: 14th January, 2020.
Appearance:
Mr. Shaunak Mitra, Adv.
Mr. Souvik Kundu, Adv.
Mr. Aritra Basu, Adv.
The Court: Award holder seeks to execute an award dated December 13, 2016.
Learned advocate appearing for the award holder seeks interim protection in terms of prayer (f) of the Tabular Statement for the present.
Learned advocate appearing for the award debtor submits that the award is a foreign award and that, necessary compliance under Section 47 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is yet to be completed. He submits that the original arbitration agreement is yet to be produced. He questions the maintainability of the execution petition at this stage. He seeks direction for filing affidavits.
In the facts of the present case, since the execution petition was filed beyond two years of the date of the award and since an issue of maintainability is 2 raised by the award debtor, it would be appropriate to permit the parties to file affidavits at this stage. Let affidavit in opposition be filed within three weeks from date; reply, if any, within two weeks thereafter. List the execution petition as "Chamber Application for Final Disposal" in the monthly list of March, 2020.
Learned advocate appearing for the award holder relies upon AIR 2004 Calcutta 142 (2004) (Centrotrade Minerals and Metals Inc. versus Hindustan Copper Ltd.) and submits that an interim order can be passed in an execution petition without necessarily deciding the issue of maintainability of the execution petition finally.
In Centrotrade Minerals and Metals Inc. (supra) an order was passed in an execution petition after hearing the parties thereto. The award debtor applied for recalling of such order. While dealing with such recalling application, it was held that, the interim order passed by the executing Court was so done after returning a finding that in absence of the interim order being passed, the application for execution and enforcement of the foreign award was likely to become infructuous. In the present case, the application for enforcement of the foreign award does not contain any the averment to such effect.
In such circumstances, I am not inclined to pass any interim order at this stage.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court be taken on record.
(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) sp/