Madhya Pradesh High Court
Union Of India vs M/S Radha Construction Company on 24 June, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
AA No. 17 of 2021
(UNION OF INDIA Vs M/S RADHA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY)
Dated : 24-06-2022
Shri Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ram Chandra Somani, learned counsel for the respondent.
Heard on the question of admission.
The appeal is admitted for final hearing.
Learned counsel for the parties are also heard at length on IA No.3607
of 2021 for grant of interim relief.
Shri Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the appellant submits that a
Division Bench of this court in A.A. No.37/2014 on 13.1.2015 considered
Order XLI Rule 5 and directed the appellant therein to deposit 50% of the
decreed amount. Thus, in consonance with the said order, the appellant is ready
to deposit 50% of the amount within two months. The respondent may be
permitted to withdraw the same subject to furnishing the adequate security to
the satisfaction of the court below. In addition, he placed reliance on para 27
and 28 of the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal No. 5432
of 2019, (Pam Develpments Private Ltd. Vs. State of West Bengal).
Shri Ram Chandra Somani countering the said argument submits that
appellant is required to deposit 100% amount and respondent may be
permitted to withdraw the same subject to furnishing the adequate security.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length on this aspect.
Recently we have considered this aspect in A.A. No.15 of 2022,
(Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Vs. JMC Projects
(India) Limited).
In the said matter, we have considered the recent Division Bench order of
Supreme Court in Yoyo Engineering Corporation and another Vs. Indian
Oil Limited passed in Civil Appeal No.4549-4550 of 2021, dated August
02, 2021. The relevant portion reads as under :-
"This Court repeatedly having held that Order XLI
Rule 5 principles are to be followed in these cases, we
find that largely because public corporations are
involved, discretion continues to be exercised not on
principles under Order XLI Rule 5 but only because
large amounts exist and that Government Corporations
have to pay these amounts under Arbitral Awards. Both
these considerations are irrelevant, as has been
pointed out by us earlier. As a matter of fact, the very
matter referred to in the order dated 09.08.2019 and
06.03.2020, namely, O.M.P. (COMM) No. 366/2017
has resulted in a dismissal of a Section 34 petition in an
award that was granted out of one of 17 other contracts
arising out of the same general transaction. Mr. Sharma
was at pains to point out that the Section 34 petition
was dismissed in that matter on completely different
grounds. Be that as it may, O.M.P. (COMM) No.
366/2017 at the highest, therefore, would be irrelevant.
This O.M.P. (COMM) No. 366/2017 appears to be the
main plank on which an amount of Rs. 125 Crores alone
was ordered to be deposited out of an awarded amount
of Rs. 662 Crores. Resultantly, we set aside both the
orders and require a 100% deposit of the awarded
amount to be made within a period of six weeks from
today. The appellants may apply to the High Court to
withdraw this amount on security. The appeals are
disposed of.
(Emphasis Supplied)
Consistent with the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court, we, in the
aforesaid matter decided to enhance the amount so deposited by the appellant
therein from 50% to 100%. We find no reason to take a different view in the
light of aforesaid order of the Supreme Court. Thus, we deem it proper to
grant stay to the appellant subject to depositing 100% of the amount with
interest as per award of the Arbitrator within 45 days from today, failing which
ad interim order will stand vacated automatically.
The respondent may withdraw the said amount subject to furnishing the
adequate security to the satisfaction of the court below.
If the appellant succeeds, said amount will be recoverable with interest.
IA No.3607 of 2021 stands disposed of.
List for final hearing in due course.
(SUJOY PAUL) (PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA)
JUDGE JUDGE
bks
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Date: 2022.06.25 11:53:58 IST
