Imax Corporation vs M/S. E City Entertainment (I) Pvt ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14352 Bom

           Digitally signed
JITENDRA   by JITENDRA
           SHANKAR
SHANKAR    NIJASURE
NIJASURE   Date: 2021.10.06
                                                                   16-n-747-2017.doc
           18:54:04 +0530



       jsn
                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                          NOTICE NO.747 OF 2017
                                                     IN
                              COMM. EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.49 OF 2017
                                                   WITH
                                COMM CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.288 OF 2017
                 Imax Corporation                               ...Applicant

                              Versus

                 E City Entertainment (I) Pvt. Ltd.             ...Respondent
                                             ----------
                 None for the Applicant.
                 Krushi Barfiala iith Rima Desai and Ryan Mendes i/b.
                 Parinam Lai Associates for the Respondent No.1.
                                                  ----------

                                                  CORAM :      R.I. CHAGLA J.
                                                  DATE :       4 OCTOBER, 2021

                 ORDER :

1. None appears for the Applicant. Heard learned

Counsel for the Respondent. She states that by an order dated

10th January, 2020 passed by the Supreme Court, a stay of

operation of the impugned judgment and order passed by the

High Court in Arbitration Petition No.414 of 2018 has been

granted.

2. She has further referred to the order dated 18th

16-n-747-2017.doc

June, 2018 passed by this Court in Notice No.747 of 2017 in the

above Commercial Execution Application No.49 of 2017 iith

Commercial Chamber Summons No.288 of 2017 by ihich order

this Court has recorded that the learned Senior Counsel

appearing for the Decree Holder / Aiard Holder has stated that

application has been fled under Sections 47 to 49 being

Arbitration Petition No.414 of 2018 in respect of foreign aiard

and in viei thereof the Execution Application and Chamber

Summons fled by the Judgment Debtor iill have to aiait the

outcome of the Arbitration Petition.

3. Considering that the Supreme Court by its order

dated 10th January, 2020 in SLP No(s). 30357 of 2019 has

stayed the impugned fnal judgment and order dated 13th

November, 2019 in Arbitration Petition No.414 of 2018 passed

by this Court, the present Notice along iith Execution

Application is required to be adjourned sine die aiaiting the

outcome of the Appeal before the Supreme Court.

4. Accordingly, the Notice No.747 of 2017 and

Commercial Chamber Summons No.288 of 2017 in Commercial

Execution Application No.49 of 2017 are adjourned sine die.

[R.I. CHAGLA J.]