Calcutta High Court
Idfc First Bank Limited vs M/S. Hi Life Traders Private Limited And ... on 15 February, 2022
Author: Ravi Krishan Kapur
Bench: Ravi Krishan Kapur
ODC-22
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
[Via Video Conference]
EC/54/2022
IDFC FIRST BANK LIMITED
Versus
M/S. HI LIFE TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR
Date : 15th February, 2022 Appearance:
Mrs. Tutul Das Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ranjit Singh, Adv.
..for the decree-holder The Court:- This is an application for execution of an award dated 25th January, 2021. By the said award the judgment-debtors have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,42,206.67/- to the decree-holder.
It is submitted on behalf of the decree-holder that though an application being AP No.200 of 2021 challenging the said award which has been filed before this Court, the judgment-debtors have obtained no stay of the award. Accordingly, the decree-holder is entitled to pray for appropriate orders.
It appears from the said award that the cause of action by and between the parties arises out of a loan agreement whereby the decree-holder had advanced a sum in excess of Rs.2 crores to the judgment-debtors. After payment of initial installments, the judgment-debtors had failed to make any further 2 payment in terms of the Agreement. Ultimately, the parties initiated an arbitration proceeding and an award had been passed in favour of the decree- holder. Hence this application for execution of the award.
The judgment-debtors are represented.
It is submitted on behalf of the judgment-debtors that no copy of this application has still been served on the judgment-debtors. It is also submitted on behalf of the judgment-debtors that no notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act had ever been served on the judgment-debtors. As such, the award is without jurisdiction. It is also submitted on behalf of the judgment- debtors that an application under Section 34 has been filed and is pending before this Court.
I have considered the submissions made by the parties. It is an indisputable position that the judgment-debtors have chosen not to file an application under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
I am of the view that the non-filing of the application under Section 36 of the Act for a period of more than one year gives the decree-holder an indefeasible right to proceed by way of execution. I find no merit in the argument of the judgment debtors in trying to resist execution of the decree.
Accordingly, at this stage of the proceeding there shall be an order in terms of prayer (g) of the Tabular Statement.
It is made clear that the order of restraint is only limited to the immovable property, particulars whereof appear at paragraph 6 of the Tabular Statement. 3
In the meantime, the decree-holder is directed to serve a copy of the execution application on the Advocates appearing on behalf of the judgment- debtors.
Let this matter appear on 28th February, 2022.
(RAVI KRISHAN KAPUR, J.) S.Bag