Allahabad High Court: In a matter under Article 227 of the Constitution, pertaining to the territorial jurisdiction of the court for execution of an award, Pankaj Bhatia,J. has reiterated that Executing Court having jurisdiction to execute the award, can be any Court anywhere in the Country, where the decree can be executed.
The petitioner and the respondent entered into an agreement on 29-12-2016 for supply of Conductor and thereafter, in pursuance to the said order, an agreement dated 02-07-2018 was also entered. In terms of the said agreement, certain payments are to be made on the basis of supply made by the respondent to the petitioner. The dispute occurred with regard to the payment of the pending bill raised by the respondent. An application was moved by the respondent claiming an amount of Rs.15,27,30,879/- along with interest thereupon quantified at Rs.4,88,82,916/- through an application before the U.P. State Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, (‘the Council’).
The Council proceeded to pass an award dated 27-01-2022 against the petitioner directing to deposit total amount of Rs.9,97,58,764/- in favour of the respondent, which was directed to be paid on the delayed payment. Challenging the said award, the petitioner filed an application under Section 19 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (‘MSMED Act’) read with Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
The said application was rejected by the Commercial Court mainly on the ground that predeposit of Rs.75%, which was required under Section 19 of the MSMED Act, was not paid. Thereafter, the petitioner also filed an application for recall of this order and the same was rejected vide order dated 31-01-2023. The said order dated 31-01-2023 was challenged by filing a petition, in which no interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the respondent filed an application for execution of the award dated 27-01-2022 before the Commercial Court. The petitioner filed its objection. The said objections were rejected by the Commercial Court, vide order dated 10-03-2023, which has been challenged by the petitioner by filing the instant petition.
The petitioner contended that once the award was delivered at Kanpur, in view of the bar created by virtue of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, it is only the Court at Kanpur, which could have entertained the execution application and, the Court at Lucknow has no territorial jurisdiction.
The Court noted that the issue regarding the jurisdiction of the Executing Court was neither doubted nor was referred.
The Court said that the Executing Court having jurisdiction to execute the award, can be any Court anywhere in the Country, where the decree can be executed and thus after relying on Cheran Properties Ltd. v. Kasturi & Sons Ltd., (2018) 16 SCC 413, the Court held that the objection of the petitioner that the Court at Lucknow had no jurisdiction loses its relevance and is worthy of rejection. Thus, there is no error or infirmity in the impugned order dated 10-03-2023 passed by the Commercial Court, Lucknow.
[Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd v Shashi Cable, 2023 SCC OnLine All 2013, Order dated 13-10-2023]
Buy Constitution of India HERE
