w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Indian Oil Corporation Limited. v/s TOYO Engineering Corporation & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = L23201MH1959GOI011388

Company & Directors' Information:- OIL INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = L11101AS1959GOI001148

Company & Directors' Information:- TOYO ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28900MH1981PTC025413

Company & Directors' Information:- M & B ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200GJ1981PLC004437

Company & Directors' Information:- G. R. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1990PTC058602

Company & Directors' Information:- G G ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = L28900MH2006PLC159174

Company & Directors' Information:- V U B ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29290MH2005PTC154033

Company & Directors' Information:- N S ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29219TG1989PTC010511

Company & Directors' Information:- S S S ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27205KA1981PTC004194

Company & Directors' Information:- H M G ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45200MH1977PLC019533

Company & Directors' Information:- S R P OIL PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U23209DL1996PTC303594

Company & Directors' Information:- K R R ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29309TN1989PTC016852

Company & Directors' Information:- G G ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28900MH2006PLC159174

Company & Directors' Information:- D B ENGINEERING PRIVATE LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1986PTC026541

Company & Directors' Information:- G G ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28900MH2006PTC159174

Company & Directors' Information:- J P ENGINEERING CORPN PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U34103WB1951PTC019638

Company & Directors' Information:- S N B ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27106DL2007PTC301213

Company & Directors' Information:- T P W ENGINEERING LTD [Active] CIN = U27203WB1975PLC029939

Company & Directors' Information:- C L ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U34300PB1992PTC012057

Company & Directors' Information:- W & W ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900TN2003PTC051228

Company & Directors' Information:- M L R ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TG2006PTC051974

Company & Directors' Information:- K B ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74160TG1988PTC008366

Company & Directors' Information:- R P ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29299WB1992PTC055482

Company & Directors' Information:- J & K ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45203JK2006PLC002684

Company & Directors' Information:- S P T ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U27109UP2005PTC030940

Company & Directors' Information:- A R F ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27200TN1980PLC008347

Company & Directors' Information:- TOYO ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31409DL1976PLC008400

Company & Directors' Information:- A M ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U65910MH1981PTC187856

Company & Directors' Information:- S. S. E. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36990MH2007PTC175320

Company & Directors' Information:- C T ENGINEERING LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29259GJ1986PLC009007

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND S ENGINEERING INDIA PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29199GJ1995PTC027661

Company & Directors' Information:- U AND R ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29199TZ1999PTC009012

Company & Directors' Information:- I Q ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U85110KA1996PTC021507

Company & Directors' Information:- G M ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28910GJ2013PTC077091

Company & Directors' Information:- W. E. ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. [Active] CIN = U52335WB1985PTC039370

Company & Directors' Information:- L. B. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999WB2018PTC225084

Company & Directors' Information:- R I ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210KA1991PTC012420

Company & Directors' Information:- U D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32109DL1999PTC102586

Company & Directors' Information:- K M T S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29192DL2005PTC141240

Company & Directors' Information:- C A G ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U00350PB2006PLC029521

Company & Directors' Information:- C A G ENGINEERING LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29110PB2006PLC029521

Company & Directors' Information:- D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29269TZ1932PTC000046

Company & Directors' Information:- V K B ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL2005PTC141483

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72200PN1999PTC014259

Company & Directors' Information:- C N C ENGINEERING LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93000KA1986PLC007922

Company & Directors' Information:- M K V ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29199TZ1997PTC007736

Company & Directors' Information:- G V T ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29219DL1996PTC082427

Company & Directors' Information:- K. I. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999WB2009PTC133109

Company & Directors' Information:- G M E P ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29192DL1998PTC096737

Company & Directors' Information:- J T ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1984PTC018756

Company & Directors' Information:- M C ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1972PTC006392

Company & Directors' Information:- M K S OIL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U23201DL2013PTC250459

Company & Directors' Information:- C P ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27209TN1987PTC014052

Company & Directors' Information:- H V S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28920MH2005PTC158342

Company & Directors' Information:- S C ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210WB1982PTC035623

Company & Directors' Information:- U M ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29200MH1977PTC019574

Company & Directors' Information:- A V K ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC071971

Company & Directors' Information:- S K ENGINEERING CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U05001UP1952PTC002408

Company & Directors' Information:- G D ENGINEERING COMPANY (INDIA) PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74210WB1993PTC058553

Company & Directors' Information:- V M R ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29120DL2005PTC136764

Company & Directors' Information:- K. S. I. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U36999HR2007PTC036660

Company & Directors' Information:- N S S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28999KA1989PTC010312

Company & Directors' Information:- A P V ENGINEERING CO LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U29113WB1945PLC006428

Company & Directors' Information:- G B ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29212PB1996PTC017500

Company & Directors' Information:- C M S ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74210TN2010PTC075302

Company & Directors' Information:- OIL CORPORATION OF INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15133UP1952PTC002471

Company & Directors' Information:- T S C ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70109DL2011PTC217251

Company & Directors' Information:- H T S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2008PTC187914

Company & Directors' Information:- T P ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45201OR2010PTC011517

Company & Directors' Information:- O.I.L PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15400DL2013PTC255692

Company & Directors' Information:- S B ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29199GJ1982PTC005292

Company & Directors' Information:- J J ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29219WB1986PTC041433

Company & Directors' Information:- D & L ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U29113TN2004PTC052690

Company & Directors' Information:- H R P ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31503MH1997PTC108621

Company & Directors' Information:- S H ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70101WB1999PTC088930

Company & Directors' Information:- V K S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28133TN2005PTC057283

Company & Directors' Information:- M K ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U29199GJ1995PTC027278

Company & Directors' Information:- K J ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29299PN2006PTC129171

Company & Directors' Information:- C S S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45302TN2003PTC051161

Company & Directors' Information:- N. P. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31100WB2010PTC150609

Company & Directors' Information:- S R K ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U67120WB1994PTC063442

Company & Directors' Information:- M P T ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U29299KL1994PTC007761

Company & Directors' Information:- T S R C ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29100UP2020PTC133920

Company & Directors' Information:- A K ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U50300UP1981PTC005354

Company & Directors' Information:- H M T D ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U99999MH1981PTC035175

Company & Directors' Information:- J P ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28129MH1972PTC015813

Company & Directors' Information:- V M ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U28920MH1969PTC014224

Company & Directors' Information:- H M A ENGINEERING LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45209PB2008PLC031777

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIAN CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65993TN1946PTC000988

Company & Directors' Information:- K S M ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210TG1997PTC028612

Company & Directors' Information:- M M ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Converted to LLP] CIN = U28932MH1979PTC021819

Company & Directors' Information:- N G T ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U27109WB1968PTC027292

Company & Directors' Information:- P P OIL PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15141MH1999PTC117925

Company & Directors' Information:- M A S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1976PTC019233

Company & Directors' Information:- G R K ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74200AP2011PTC076356

Company & Directors' Information:- P N S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29120TN2006PTC060120

Company & Directors' Information:- K P ENGINEERING CORPORATION PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74200WB1961PTC025258

Company & Directors' Information:- M A N INDIA ENGINEERING LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74200WB1979PLC020893

Company & Directors' Information:- R V K ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29253TN2010PTC074505

Company & Directors' Information:- R K ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1975PTC007743

Company & Directors' Information:- G S A ENGINEERING CORPN PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74210WB1957PTC023382

Company & Directors' Information:- A R M ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED. [Strike Off] CIN = U00500JH1988PTC003057

Company & Directors' Information:- L & V ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45202MZ2005PTC007690

Company & Directors' Information:- S G A ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29200MH2005PTC154349

Company & Directors' Information:- C P C ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29120TZ1986PTC001880

Company & Directors' Information:- P K R ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29130TZ2004PTC011094

Company & Directors' Information:- R R K ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999WB2011PTC161080

Company & Directors' Information:- D M S ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U28920WB1964PTC026168

Company & Directors' Information:- S D S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28999PN2000PTC014838

Company & Directors' Information:- N T ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999PY1986PTC000445

Company & Directors' Information:- R K ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31100MH2005PTC152838

Company & Directors' Information:- V J S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29130TN1996PTC036636

Company & Directors' Information:- R. K. V. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29253MH2010PTC205237

Company & Directors' Information:- U S ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U34300CH1986PTC006887

Company & Directors' Information:- A D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74210OR1989PTC002348

Company & Directors' Information:- R J ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U27107RJ1972PTC001441

Company & Directors' Information:- H F ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29244KL2013PTC033909

Company & Directors' Information:- O N ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1988PTC031987

Company & Directors' Information:- P S R ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U40200WB1987PTC042244

Company & Directors' Information:- P N ENGINEERING CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74210WB1980PTC032750

Company & Directors' Information:- A M A R ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29219DL1997PTC084187

Company & Directors' Information:- S G D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29210KA2009PTC050452

Company & Directors' Information:- G A S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29191MH2004PTC149606

Company & Directors' Information:- G T ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29219PN2012PTC145781

Company & Directors' Information:- M. M. K. ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29305MH2014PTC252830

Company & Directors' Information:- K-4 ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31400MH2010PTC204004

Company & Directors' Information:- N J ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45209MH2015PTC262607

Company & Directors' Information:- P R S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29253TN2009PTC073915

Company & Directors' Information:- U P S ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40300TN2013PTC090167

Company & Directors' Information:- K G D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400WB2014PTC200732

Company & Directors' Information:- T A ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U28992CH2003PTC025800

Company & Directors' Information:- M N A ENGINEERING PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U45202CH2006PTC030215

Company & Directors' Information:- A A P ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27106DL2005PTC138318

Company & Directors' Information:- A C ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29253DL2011PTC222515

Company & Directors' Information:- S. Z. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U29253DL2014PTC274095

Company & Directors' Information:- IN ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74210DL2011PTC212284

Company & Directors' Information:- J N ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2015PTC278906

Company & Directors' Information:- N I ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45400DL2015PTC280734

Company & Directors' Information:- A N D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51502DL2012PTC242516

Company & Directors' Information:- R R V ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51909DL1997PTC089342

Company & Directors' Information:- Z. M. ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909DL2007PTC168270

Company & Directors' Information:- K Y ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2013PTC248278

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND T ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U34300DL2005PTC136846

Company & Directors' Information:- THE ENGINEERING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999KA1951PTC000699

Company & Directors' Information:- S J P ENGINEERING CO. PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51505KA2002PTC030808

Company & Directors' Information:- S I ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U27109UP1967PTC003182

Company & Directors' Information:- W D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U29308MH2020PTC345065

Company & Directors' Information:- S D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U18101DL1999PTC102948

Company & Directors' Information:- B F OIL PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15141DL1993PTC052160

Company & Directors' Information:- M B D ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74210DL2008PTC181446

Company & Directors' Information:- A. B. C. ENGINEERING CORPORATION LIMITED [Not available for efiling] CIN = U99999MH1950PLC008192

Company & Directors' Information:-  ENGINEERING COMPANY ( [Not Available for eFiling] CIN = U99999MH1951PLC010002

    O.M.P. (COMM). No. 316 of 2019 & IA. No. 10900 of 2019

    Decided On, 06 March 2020

    At, High Court of Delhi

    By, THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

    For the Petitioner: Rajeev Sharma, Nishant Menon, Reeta Mishra, Deepesh, Abhishek Birthary, Advocates. For the Respondents: Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate, Rajshekhar Rao, Sudip Mullick, Susmit Pushkar, Yigal Gabriel, Anchit Oswal, Gaurav Sharma, Monika Singh, Advocates.



Judgment Text


I.A. No. 1296/2020

1. This is an application filed under Section 36 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Order XLI Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC on behalf of the respondents for modification of the order dated 09.08.2019 passed by this Court. The contention of the applicants/respondents is that the current Arbitration was invoked on 13.05.2013 and the Award was rendered on 11.03.2019. The Arbitration and Conciliation Amendment Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) received the assent of the President of India on 09.08.2019 and was published in the Official Gazette on the same date. The interim order whose modification is being sought was also passed on 09.08.2019 wherein the Court has directed the petitioner to make only a partial deposit of the awarded amount, which works out to only about 20%.

2. Learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that without prejudice to the contentions that the Amendment Act was not applicable to the present proceedings and there would not have been an automatic stay, the Supreme Court in a recent case in Hindustan Construction Company Limited & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1520 has declared Section 87 introduced by way of the Amendment Act to be unconstitutional. As a result of this, the current proceedings will be governed by the 2015 Amendment Act and there cannot be an automatic stay on the Enforcement of the Arbitral Award.

3. Mr. Nayar, learned Senior Advocate, contends that in the case of HCC (Supra) the Supreme Court held that an award holder should not be deprived of the fruits of the award rendered in his favour and therefore the petitioner should be directed to deposit the entire awarded amount, which in his submission, along with the post-award interest as on 27.01.2020, is Rs. 695 Crores. Learned senior counsel further contends that in the recent past, Co-ordinate Benches including the Division Benches of this Court have directed deposit of the full awarded amount. Reliance is placed on the order dated 16.07.2019 passed in the case of Mathur & Kapre Associates Private Limited v. ESIC, OMP (ENF) (COMM) 114/2019 as well as order dated 12.09.2019 in the case of Serum Institute of India Ltd. v. Union of India, OMP (ENF) (COMM) 158/2019. Reliance is further placed on the following orders:-

i. Zapdor-UBS-ABN (JV) v. Central Organization of Railway Electrification (Core): Order dated 18.09.2019 passed in OMP (ENF) (COMM) 163/2019.

ii. S. Ghosh & Associates v. Delhi Development Authority: Order dated 25.09.2019 passed in OMP (ENF) (COMM) 169/2019

iii. Seaspray Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Steel Authority of India Ltd: Order dated 26.09.2019 passed in OMP (ENF) (COMM) 80/2019

4. Learned senior counsel further argues that this Court has recently in the case of Power Mech Projects Ltd. v. SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation, OMP (I) (COMM) 523/2017 decided on 17.02.2020, directed the petitioner therein to deposit the entire principal amount, awarded in favour of the respondent, despite the fact that there were previous orders of Court, in that very case, directing deposit of lesser amount, along with Bank Guarantee of Rs. 30 Crores, as against the awarded amount of Rs. 142 Crores (Principal). The argument, therefore, is that the order dated 09.08.2019 should be modified to bring it in line with the recent judgments, and the petitioner be directed to deposit Rs. 695 Crores.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand vehemently opposes the application. Mr. Sharma arguing on behalf of petitioner/non-applicant submits that the respondents are seeking modification of the interim order dated 09.08.2019 without there being any change in the circumstances and none has even been pleaded by the respondents, to warrant a modification of the order. It is argued that the application is an abuse of the process of law and the respondents are seeking a re-hearing of an issue which was argued at length on 09.08.2019 and settled by Court after a detailed hearing.

6. Mr. Sharma further argues that the respondents are giving a wrong impression, that the order was passed at a point in time when the law permitted an automatic stay of the Arbitral Award, during the pendency of proceedings under Section 34 of the Act. He submits that this is completely wrong as on 09.08.2019 the legal position was that there was no automatic stay of the Arbitral Awards and it is for this reason that the petitioner had filed an application for stay of the operation of the Impugned Award. The respondents had argued at length opposing the application. Their opposition was taken note of and the Court after hearing and being satisfied that the petitioner had a prima facie case on merits had passed the order directing deposit of Rs. 125 crores. Learned counsel vehemently submits that the order itself indicates that the Court was of the view that the Impugned Award was contrary to an earlier judgment of this Court and the case of the petitioner being covered by it warranted that the enforcement of the Award be stayed.

7. Mr. Sharma further argues that the order was passed considering the 2015 Amendment Act and the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Board of Control for Cricket in India V. Kochi Cricket Private Limited and Ors., (2018) 6 SCC 287 whereby the Amendments in 2015 were made applicable to Court proceedings which had commenced thereafter. The Court was conscious of the legislative and legal mandate and so was the petitioner who had filed a stay application being IA No. 10900/2019. It is argued that there is no mandate of law that the Court must direct a 100% deposit by a party which is challenging the Award and it is merely the discretion of the Court to direct the amount of deposit depending on facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case, the Court has already exercised its discretion under Section 36(2) & (3) of the Act and directed deposit of Rs. 125 Crores.

8. Mr. Sharma has further argued that even the figure of Rs. 125 Crores which has been directed to be deposited is not without significance. He points out that the principal amount awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal is Rs. 458 Crores and out of this a sum of Rs. 321 Crores is on account of the price discount, which is an issue already covered against the respondent by an earlier judgment in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Larsen & Toubro Limited, OMP (COMM) 366/2017. Thus, the dispute between the parties that is not covered by the said judgment would only be for an amount of Rs. 125 Crores, assuming that the petitioner was to succeed on account of the issue relating to Rs. 321 Crores. Keeping this in mind, the Court has rightly directed deposit of Rs. 125 Crores and there is no reason why the order should be modified.

9. Mr. Sharma also argues that the petitioner is a ‘Maharatna’ Company and there is no risk of the Impugned Award not being honored, if the petitioner fails in its endeavor to have the same set aside.

10. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

11. There is no quarrel with the proposition urged by Mr. Nayar, learned Senior Advocate that after the judgment of the Supreme Court in HCC (Supra), there is no automatic stay on the enforcement of an Award, only because an Award is challenged by a party by filing a petition under Section 34 of the Act. Mr. Nayar is also right in his contention that the Supreme Court in the said case has clearly held that an award holder must be able to reap the fruits of an award in its favour and should not suffer only because the other party has chosen to challenge the Award, as it is a well-known fact that litigations can go on for a long time. The Supreme Court has clearly held that the Arbitral Award is a money decree and should be enforced accordingly.

12. The controversy which this Court has to decide in the present application is whether the interim order passed by the Court on 09.08.2019 directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 125 crores which is approximately 20% of the awarded amount, deserves to be modified. Mr.Nayar rightly submits that in the recent past the Supreme Court and this Court have passed several orders where the objector has been directed to deposit 75% or even 100% of the awarded amount, before the enforcement of the award is stayed. But in my view the stage for considering the amount which the petitioner must deposit for seeking stay on the enforcement of the Award was on 09.08.2019, when the Court heard both the parties on the stay application. It was at that stage that the Court was called upon to exercise its discretion on the basis of the law and the facts and circumstances of the case and decide whether the entire awarded amount should be deposited or a part of the said amount. Mr. Sharma, in my view, rightly contends that the Court at that stage had heard the parties at length and had exercised its discretion directing a deposit of Rs. 125 Crores. The question therefore that arises is whether the Court can be called upon to exercise this discretion once again and modify the order despite the fact that there has been no change of any circumstance between 09.08.2019 and the date when the present application was filed. It is significant to note that the respondents have not pleaded any change of circumstances in the application and nor was any such argument even raised during the hearing of the application. The two grounds that are sought to be raised by the applicant do not relate to any change of circumstance.

13. The first ground raised by the respondents is that when the order was passed by the Court on 09.08.2019, the 2019 Amendment Act had been notified on the said date itself. The Court was in a regime where Section 87 had been introduced and it was an era of an automatic stay. In my view, the argument of the respondents is not correct. The petitioner is right in its contention that it was conscious of the fact that there would be no automatic stay of the Award and therefore it had filed an application for stay of the operation of the Award. Had the contention of the respondents been correct, in my view, the Court would not have passed an order of directing even the deposit of Rs. 125 Crores, before staying the Enforcement of the Award as an automatic stay would not entail any deposit by the objector. In fact, the order itself indicates that even the Court was conscious that there could not have been an automatic stay and therefore directed a deposit of Rs. 125 Crores by the petitioner subject to which it had stayed the Enforcement of the Award.

14. In so far as the second ground is concerned, Mr. Nayar has vehemently argued that the Courts have in recent orders and judgments been insisting on the full deposit of the entire amount. He has also relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of SEPCO (supra) to contend that an earlier order directing a deposit of lesser amount was modified by this Court and it was directed that the entire principal amount under the award be deposited.

15. I have gone through the various orders including the judgment passed by this Court in the case of SEPCO (supra). It is important to mention that in the case of SEPCO (supra), this Court had noted that there is no mandate of law that in every case the Court should direct 100% deposit of the awarded amount. This is purely in the discretion of the Court and the discretion has to be exercised in the facts and circumstances of each case. In so far as SEPCO (supra) is concerned what had weighed was the fact that the petitioner therein was a foreign Company, with no assets in India. The various affidavits filed by it disclosing its ongoing projects were also a subject matter of serious dispute between the parties. Most significantly, the distinguishing factor in the case of SEPCO (supra) was that when the Court passed the order on 17.02.2020, it was exercising its discretion to direct the petitioner to deposit an amount subject to which the Enforcement of the Award was to be stayed and it was also to be decided whether petition was to be admitted to hearing. Therefore, the stage in SEPCO (supra) was a stage which is comparable with the stage in the present petition when the order of 09.08.2019 was passed. Thus, in my view the two cases are incomparable.

16. Learned counsel for the petitioner in my view is also right in its contention that when the order was passed on 09.08.2019, the Court was of the prima facie view that the petitioner had a good case on merits and was prima facie covered by an earlier judgment of this Court with regard to at least one issue. The fact that this factor weighed with the Court is evident from a bare reading of the said Order of 09.08.2019 where the Court records this contention of the petitioner as well as the judgment in the earlier case. The Order also indicates that the respondents were heard at length before the said Order was passed and at the cost of repetition, I must state that t

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

here has been no change in any circumstance from the date of passing of that Order till date. 17. In so far as the various orders relied upon by the respondents are concerned, I may only notice that the orders passed in those cases are in the Enforcement petitions where obviously there have been no earlier orders of the Court directing deposit of the amount for staying the enforcement of the award. In so far as the judgment in the case of Pam Developments Private Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, Civil Appeal No. 5432/2019, is concerned and which is relied upon by the respondents, it can only be said that the proposition of law laid down therein can hardly be questioned. The Supreme Court in the said judgment has held that no special treatment under the Act can be given only because Government is a party and the CPC as well as the Arbitration Act cull out no difference between a private party and the Government as a party. In my view this judgment cannot help the respondents since in the present case, the main ground of the petitioner is not that it must be given an exceptional treatment or indulgence only because it is a Public Sector Undertaking. The main contention of the petitioner as brought out above is that the Court having exercised its discretion once, there being no change of circumstance, the Order calls for no modification. 18. In my view there is thus no merit in the application and the same is hereby dismissed.
O R