Ncc Ltd ( Formerly Known As Nagarjuna ... vs Union Of India on 3 July, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Ncc Ltd ( Formerly Known As Nagarjuna ... vs Union Of India on 3 July, 2020

Bench: Rekha Palli

$~2
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     E.A 941/2019 IN OMP(ENF)(COMM)209/2019
      NCC LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS NAGARJUNA
      CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED)           ..... Decree Holder
                    Through:    Ms. Priya Kumar with Mr. Tejas
                    Chhabra, Adv.

                         Versus

      UNION OF INDIA                        ..... Judgement Debtor
                    Through:      Mr. Jasmeet Singh CGSC, Mr.
                    Gaurav Rohilla and Mr. Srivats Kaushal, Advs.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

                         ORDER

      %                  03.07.2020
      EX.APPL. (OS) 551/2020

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

EX.APPL. (OS) 554/2020

2. The applicant will file the requisite affidavits within two weeks of the normal functioning of the Court being restored.

3. The application is disposed of.

E.A 941/2019

4. This is an application filed by the Decree Holder (DH) seeking a direction to the judgment debtor (JD) to release performance bank guarantee No.1303910BG0000532 issued by State Bank of India for a sum of Rs.9,53,00,000/- along with all original extension letters.

5. Learned counsel for the DH submits that the award dated 18.03.2019, of which enforcement is being sought in the present petition, not only allowed the claim of the DH but further directed that the aforesaid bank guarantee be released to the DH. She submits that though the JD has assailed the said award by way of OMP (Comm) No.292/2019 its attempt to seek stay of the award have not been successful and therefore there is no justification for the JD to continue to withhold the performance bank guarantee.

6. Mr. Jasmeet Singh, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the JD opposes the application and contends that till the JD's stay application is decided, the directions in the award ought not to be implemented. He, therefore, prays that the DH's request for release of bank guarantee be rejected.

7. From the rival submissions of the parties it is evident that despite repeated applications by the JD seeking stay of the arbitral award, no interim order has been passed till date in OMP (Comm) 292/2019. In these circumstances, even though there is no justification on the part of the JD not to fully implement the award, I am of the view that since the JD's application for stay is still pending no direction for payment of the awarded amount to the DH may be warranted at this stage but there is no reason as to why the performance bank guarantee furnished by the DH during the execution of the contract should withheld by the JD. Even otherwise, once the learned Arbitrator found that the work under contract had been duly completed by the DH, there is absolutely no justification for the JD to retain the performance bank guarantee any further. In my view the DH's prayer for release of the bank guarantee is merited and deserves to be allowed.

8. The application is, accordingly, allowed. Consequently, the JD is directed to forthwith return the performance bank guarantee No.1303910BG0000532 issued by State Bank of India for a sum of Rs.9,53,00,000/- to the DH along with all the extension letters in original.

OMP(ENF)(COMM)209/2019

9. List on 08.09.2020, the date already fixed, along with OMP (Comm.) 292/2019.

REKHA PALLI, J.

JULY 03, 2020 'sdp'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders