Paul Berkowitz vs Rajib Saha & Anr.
2009 Latest Caselaw 1754 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                                Date of Reserve: March 25, 2009
                                                    Date of Order: April 29, 2009

+ OMP 643/2008
%                                                                     29.04.2009
    Paul Berkowitz                                            ...Petitioner
    Through: Mr. Sachin Datta, Advocate


      Versus

      Rajib Saha & Anr.                              ...Respondents
      Through : Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajat Joneja and Mr.
      Sindhu Sinha, Advocates


      JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1.    Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.    To be referred to the reporter or not?

3.    Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?


      JUDGMENT

1. By this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act,

1996, the petitioner/claimant submitted that the learned Arbitral Tribunal has

passed an award for the sum of Rs.2, 11, 52,000/- in favour of the petitioner

(claimant) with a cost of Rs.10 lac and interest @ 18% on this amount. The

petitioner apprehends that instead of complying with the award, the

respondent shall try to render implementation of the award as infructuous by

eliminating the properties and by diluting the worth of shares of respondent

No.1 company by issuing fresh shares. The petitioner, therefore, made a

prayer that this Court should restrain respondent No.1 from alienating,

transferring the property bearing number A-847, Lavy Pinto Block, Asiad

Village Complex, New Delhi and also property at Central Park, Phase-II, Block

K, Floor-2, Sona Road, Sector-48, Gurgaon, Haryana.

OMP 643/08 Paul Berkowitz v. Rajib Saha & Anr. Page 1 Of 2

2. The objections of the respondents against award in question filed vide

OMP No.83 of 2009 have been dismissed by this Court vide a separate order.

Since the amount involved in the award is heavy and there is every likelihood

that the respondents may try to defeat the execution of the award by

alienating the property, I consider that it is appropriate that respondent No.1

Mr. Rajib Saha is restrained from alienating, transferring or selling the

properties at A-847, Lavy Pinto Block, Asiad Village Complex, New Delhi and

Central Park, Phase-II, Block K, Floor-2, Sona Road, Sector-48, Gurgaon,

Haryana. The respondent No.1 is hereby restrained from alienating,

transferring or selling the immovable properties held by him individually or

jointly with others. The respondent No.1 is also directed to maintain status

quo in respect of shares held by him in respondent No.2 company.

3. With above directions, this petition stands disposed of.

April 29 , 2009                                    SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.
rd




OMP 643/08         Paul Berkowitz v. Rajib Saha & Anr.           Page 2 Of 2