Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Steel Authority Of India Limited vs Htc Engineering (1958) Pvt. Ltd on 21 August, 2019

Author: I. P. Mukerji

Bench: I. P. Mukerji, Md. Nizamuddin

OD-3
                                  ORDER SHEET

                                APO No.441 of 2017
                                       With
                                 AP No.218 of 2006

                       IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                           Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                                 ORIGINAL SIDE



                      STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED
                                  Versus
                       HTC ENGINEERING (1958) PVT. LTD.


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN
  Date : 21st August, 2019.


                                                                  Appearance :
                                                 Mr. K.K. Bandyapadhyay, Adv.
                                           Mr. Supriya Dubey Chakraborty, Adv.
                                                 Ms. Shilpi Gangopadhyay, Adv.

                                                       Mr. Sayantan Bose, Adv.
                                                          Mr. Dilip Ghosh, Adv.
                                                     Mr. Saugata Banerjee, Adv.


             The Court : The appeal of the appellant (APO 356 of 2016 arising

out of AP 218 of 2006) is pending. It is an appeal from an order in a Section 34

application dismissing the appellant's application under Section 34 of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1906.

            Meanwhile the respondent, the award-holder, under the award in-

question dated 17th March, 2006 took out an execution application where execution was commenced by orders passed by this Court. The instant appeal, APO 441 of 2017, is an appeal from those orders.

Mr. Bose, learned counsel for the respondent, makes a statement before this Court that by virtue of the most recent amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, made in 2019, once the appellant has preferred the appeal, APO 356 of 2016, there was automatic stay of the execution proceedings.

At any rate his client would not continue with the enforcement of the award till the disposal of the appeal.

2

Such submission is recorded.

Hence, the present appeal, APO No.441 of 2017 is disposed of by recording the above submissions of learned counsel.

All undertakings are discharged.

(I. P. MUKERJI, J.) (MD. NIZAMUDDIN, J.) cs