Master Abhishek Mehra & Ors v. Jlg Retails Ltd & Ors

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

SEPTEMBER 26, 2018 'pp'.. (corrected and released on 26th October, 2018).

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 26th September, 2018. + EX.F.A. 23/2018 MASTER ABHISHEK MEHRA & ORS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Aman Bhalla, Ms. Aastha Dhawan and Mr. Ali R. Osmani, Advs. versus JLG RETAILS LTD & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Naveen Sharma, Mr. S.K. Sharma and Mr. Sachin, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. This Execution First Appeal under Order XXI Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the order [dated 27th April, 2014 in Execution No.69/2017 of the Court of the Additional District Judge-05, New Delhi] of dismissal of the application filed by the appellants for execution of an Arbitral Award as a decree, accepting the objections filed by the respondents/judgment debtors. 2. This appeal came up first before this Court on 31st May, 2018, when upon the counsel for the appellant referring to Chairman and M.D., N.T.P.C. Ltd. Vs. Reshmi Constructions, Builders and Contractors AIR 2004 SC 1330, notice of the appeal was ordered to be issued. All the four respondents stand served and Mr. Naveen Sharma, Advocate appears on their behalf. The counsels have been heard and the copies of the record annexed to the memorandum of appeal perused. 3. The appellants/decree holders filed the application for execution of Arbitral Award dated 11th November, 2011 corrected on 16th November, 2011, and application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 preferred with respect whereto was dismissed vide judgment dated 20th April, 2012 in OMP No.366/2012 of this Court and appeal under Section 37 preferred whereagainst being FAO No.532/2012 was dismissed on 7th November, 2012 by the Division Bench of this Court and Special Leave Petition (C) No.10108/2013 preferred whereagainst was dismissed on 18th March, 2013. 4. The appellants/decree holders, against the column "whether any payment has been received towards satisfaction of decree/order", of the prescribed application form for seeking extension, stated "a payment of Rs.7,23,390/- was made by the judgment debtors which was accepted by the decree holders without prejudice to all their rights and contentions. Hence the present execution petition". Similarly, against the column "amount of suit along with interest as per decree or any other relief granted by the decree" stated (i) that the Arbitral Award was for a sum of Rs.25,25,977.28p along with interest at @ Rs.15% pendente lite and future interest till the date of payment; (ii) that after adjusting the monies received by the appellant, the amount to be paid under the Arbitral Award inclusive of proportionate costs awarded and interest, was Rs.40,08,769.60p; and, (iii) that the respondents, under the Arbitral Award were entitled to adjust the security deposit amount of Rs.16,46,000/-. 5. The respondents/judgment debtors filed objections to the aforesaid application for execution inter alia pleading as under:- "After passing of the Award, the Decree Holder on 19.01.2012 voluntarily, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, after due deliberations with the Judgment Debtor agreed to accept a sum of Rs.7,23,391/- in full and final settlement of all his claims against the Judgment Debtor in respect of the Award dated 16.11.2011 passed by the Ld. Arbitrator. The Decree Holder in pursuance of the said settlement executed a Receipt-cum-Undertaking dated 19.01.2012 and accepted the afore-said amount of Rs.7,23,391/- by way of three Demand Drafts. Copy of the Receipt-cum-Undertaking dated 19.01.2012 is annexed as Annexure A-1. That the Decree Holder in the above-said Receipt-cum- Undertaking also undertook not to challenge the Award dated 16.11.2011 passed by the Ld. Arbitrator in any manner whatsoever. But the Decree Holder after receiving the said amount became greedy and with dishonest intentions to extract more money from the Judgment Debtor challenged the Award by filing an Appeal before this Hon'ble Court in April 2012. The said Ap