HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/B) No. 818 of 2025 UJVN Limited ….....Petitioner Versus MS SCL Boving Fourcess Ltd ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. (Dr.) Ajar Rab, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Garg, Advocate for the respondent. Dated: 26th September, 2025 Coram: Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The challenge in the instant petition is made to the following:- (i) Order dated 25.06.2025, passed in Arbitration Execution No.13 of 2025, M/s SCL Boving Fouress Ltd. (BFL) JV v. UJVN Limited (“the execution case”), by which the petitioner is directed to pay the awarded amount to the decree/award holder by the next date fixed. (ii) The order dated 08.09.2025, passed in the execution case, by which the earlier directions dated 25.06.2025, has been reiterated and the petitioner has been directed to comply with the order dated 25.06.2025. The petitioner also seeks directions that the proceedings of the execution case may be stayed till the disposal of 2 the Arbitration Case No.52 of 2020, UJVN Limited Vs. M/s SCL Boving Fouress Ltd. (BFL) JV and Arbitration No.51 of 2020, UJVN Limited vs. M/s SCL Boving Fouress Ltd. (BFL) JV (“the arbitration cases”), filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”). In alternate, the petitioner seeks directions that the stay application that has been filed by the petitioner in the arbitration cases may be decided before proceeding further in the execution case. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had challenged an award by way of filing an application under the Act, which is the basis of the arbitration cases. In the arbitration cases, the petitioner has also filed an application for stay of the execution of the award, which has yet not been decided, but on the other hand, by the impugned orders dated 25.06.2025 and 08.09.2025, the petitioner has been directed to pay the amount of decree/award to the judgment debtor. He submits that it is not in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that merely filing an application under Section 34 of the Act does not stay the execution in itself. He submits that the provisions of Section 36 of the Act comes into play in such matters, and stay of the award may be granted subject to the conditions, as given under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“the Code”), particularly, he referred to Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code. According to him, the 3 judgment decree has no option but deposit the entire decreetal amount before he applies for stay. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at it, readily agreed that the petitioner is ready to deposit the amount of award, but he submits that the execution should not proceed. 6. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. Subject to the petitioner’s depositing the amount of award within a period of 10 days from today, the execution of the award shall remain in abeyance. The impugned orders are modified accordingly. 8. The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. (Alok Mahra, J.) (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 26.09.2025 Ravi Bisht