- (1.) This should bring to an end an unsavoury episode that has done no credit to the public sector company involved herein or to the judiciary in this country. This may also be regarded as the epilogue to the judgment of March 20, 2012 by which the award-debtor's petition for challenging a foreign arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was rejected on the ground of maintainability.
(2.) The parties entered into an agreement in 1989 for the foreign company to set up a coal-extracting facility for the Indian company in the Rajmahal area in the State of Jharkhand. The dispute-resolution mechanism envisaged under the agreement was of arbitration; and, the arbitration was to take place under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) with the place of arbitration in Geneva, Switzerland. Disputes arose between the parties as to whether the Indian company was entitled to more money by way of penalty than the foreign company was to get bonus. The Indian company sought a reference. The parties nominated their representatives on the arbitral tribunal and the presiding arbitrator was filled in by the ICC. The arbitral tribunal held its meetings in the United Kingdom but recognised that the seat of the arbitration was Switzerland. The rival claims were dismissed by the arbitral tribunal and the foreign company was awarded substantial costs. The present execution is for enforcing the foreign award for costs. The award is dated March 1, 2002. The present proceedings were initiated in July, 2013, about a year after the Indian company's challenge to the arbitral award failed before the arbitration bench in this court on March 20, 2012. The judgment of March 20, 2012 was affirmed in appeal on January 15, 2013. A special leave petition against the appellate order was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
(3.) Section 49 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 mandates that where the court is satisfied that a foreign award is enforceable under Chapter I of Part II of the Act, the award shall be deemed to be a decree of that court. Part II of 1996 Act deals with the enforcement of certain foreign awards and Chapter I thereunder pertains to New York Convention awards. Section 46 of the Act recognises that a foreign award made under the New York Convention, when found to be enforceable under Chapter II, shall be treated as binding for all purposes on the persons as between whom it was made. Section 47 of the Act lays down the conditions that are required to be complied with for the enforcement of a New York Convention arbitral award. No objection has been raised by the award-debtor on any of the grounds under Section 47 of the Act. In any event, the original award has been appended to the application. A duly certified copy of the original agreement for arbitration has also been furnished therewith.;