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 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

National Highways Authority Of India vs M/S. Mbl Infrastructure Limited on 4 March, 2020

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 CAL 122

Author: Arijit Banerjee

Bench: Arijit Banerjee

                               GA No.437 of 2020
                               AP No.951 of 2014

                       IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                        Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
                                 ORIGINAL SIDE


                  NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA
                                      Versus
                     M/S. MBL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED



  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE
  Date : 4th March, 2020.

                                                                          Appearance:
                                                                   Mr. Aryak Dutt, Adv.
                                                                Mr. Dipankar Das, Adv.
                                                        ...for the applicant/petitioner.

                                                   Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya, Adv.
                                                          Ms. Aryaa Chatterjee, Adv.
                                                                ...for the respondent.

The Court : This application has been taken out for stay of operation of the arbitral award dated 19th February, 2014 passed in an arbitration proceeding between the applicant/petitioner and the respondent.

The respondent was the claimant before the learned arbitral tribunal. The learned arbitrator passed an award for an aggregate sum of Rs.3,90,92,936/- in favour of the claimant/respondent and also directed that the said amount would attract interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of the award till the date of payment.

Learned Advocate for the applicant/petitioner submits that an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 2 challenging the said award was filed within the statutory time period. Such application is pending. As on the date of filing of that application, the law was that filing an application for setting aside of an arbitral award would operate as an automatic stay of operation of the award. However, the law was amended in 2015. Thereafter, it has become necessary for a party aggrieved with the award to obtain stay of operation of the award from the Court. Accordingly, this application has been filed.

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent (award-holder).

Having considered the facts and circumstances of this case, in my opinion, it will be proper to stay the operation of the award subject to the petitioner depositing the entire awarded amount with the Registrar, Original Side, High Court. The awarded amount along with interest as on date would be much in excess of Rs.4 crores. However, I think that ends of justice will be served if the petitioner deposits Rs.4 crore minus the amount that the petitioner has kept separately in a fixed deposit as per orders of this Court with the Registrar, Original Side of this Court. Such deposit will be made with the Registrar, Original Side within three weeks from date. The Registrar, Original Side, shall invest the amount so deposited by the petitioner in a fixed deposit with a scheduled bank which offers the highest rate of interest and shall keep the fixed deposit renewed from time to time until further orders of this Court.

There shall be an unconditional stay of operation of the award in question for three weeks from date. The order of stay shall continue till the disposal of the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation 3 Act, 1996 subject to the petitioner depositing the aforesaid amount with the Registrar, Original Side within the time period stipulated.

It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to deposit the amount with the Registrar, Original Side as indicated above within the time period fixed, the order of stay shall automatically stand vacated after three weeks.

No useful purpose will be served by keeping this application pending. Since I have not called for affidavits, the allegations made in the application are deemed not to be admitted by the respondent.

Accordingly, GA No.437 of 2020 is disposed of.

(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.) sm.