- (1.) The Court: This is an application for execution of a foreign arbitral award dated June 8, 2015 made by a learned sole Arbitrator in ARB no.233 of 2013 obtained by the petitioner, a foreign company against the respondent, a company incorporated in India. A copy of the application was also served upon the respondent. From the materials on record, it appears that by an order dated February 7, 2018, a learned Single Judge of this Court upheld the contention raised by the respondent-award debtor company that the foreign arbitral award sought to be executed by the petitioner is not enforceable. In an appeal being APO 92 of 2018 filed by the petitioner, the Division Bench of this Court passed an order dated May 14, 2018 thereby setting aside the said decision of the learned Single Judge. The Division Bench held that the present petitioner is free to implement the foreign award dated June 8, 2015. The respondent-award debtor carried the said decision of the Division Bench before the Supreme Court in petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.2210/2018. By an order dated September 7, 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed the said petition.
(2.) In the meantime, on June 20, 2018 an order was passed in this application directing the award debtor not to operate its bank account without keeping a sum of Rs.91,59,782/- in one of its bank accounts. The said order was passed in presence of the learned Advocate representing the respondent-award debtor. The respondent, however, did not comply with the direction passed on June 20, 2018. Thus, by an order dated August 1, 2018 the hearing of this application was adjourned till August 21, 2018 and the respondent was directed to comply with the direction passed by the order dated June 20, 2018. In the said order dated August 1, 2018 it was recorded that in the event of any failure on the part of the judgment debtor-respondent to comply with the said order dated June 20, 2018 warrants of arrest shall be issued against the directors and/or principal officers of the award debtor. Once again, the respondent did not comply with the direction passed on June 20, 2018 and on August 21, 2018 the time for filing of the affidavit of assets by the respondent company was extended till August 24, 2018 and the hearing of this application was adjourned till September 18, 2018. As mentioned earlier, on September 7, 2018 the Special Leave Petition filed by the respondent-award debtor was rejected by the Supreme Court.
(3.) On September 18, 2018 when this application was taken up for hearing, the respondent-award debtor remained unrepresented before this Court and, as such, an order was passed directing the principal officers of the respondent as named in paragraph 15 of the affidavit in support of the Tabular Statement to file an affidavit of assets on or before October 4, 2018 failing which warrants of arrest would be issued against the principal officers of the respondent-award debtor. As it appears from the affidavit of service filed by the petitioner that the said order dated September 18, 2018 has been communicated to the respondent company but its principal officers have not complied with the said order. In these facts, the petitioner prays for issuance of warrants of arrest against the principal officers of the respondent company who are named in paragraph 15 of the affidavit in support of the Tabular Statement.;