Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18168 (HP)

OM PRAKASH AND ANR v. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD

OMP/1022/2024 · 2025-06-26

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Om Prakash & Anr. Vs. Shriram Transport Finance Comp. Ltd. OMP No.1022 of 2024 in Arb. Case No.148 of 2022 26.06.2025 Present: Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Advocate, for the applicants/ petitioners. Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate for the non- applicants/respondents. OMP No.1022 of 2024 The applicants/petitioners had instituted objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short ‘the Act’) on 17.09.2022. The objections were against the order dated 10.12.2013 passed by the learned Arbitrator, whereby claim of the respondent was allowed ex-parte. Vide order dated 20.09.2022 passed in the main arbitration case, subject to applicants’/petitioners’ depositing 75% of the awarded amount within a period of six weeks, execution of the award passed by the learned Arbitrator was stayed. Pursuant to the afore-directions, the applicants/petitioners deposited the amount in the sum of Rs.5,08,000/-. 2. Reply to the petition was filed by the non- applicant/respondent, wherein, objection was taken with respect to maintainability of the objection petition on the ground that this Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the objection petition filed by the applicants/petitioners under Section 34 of the Act. 3. In view of the objection taken by the non- applicant/respondent, the applicants/petitioners sought permission to withdraw the objection petition filed under Section 34 of the Act. Their prayer was allowed. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 31.07.2024. 4. By means of present application, prayer has been made for release of the amount deposited by the applicants/petitioners in the Registry of this Court. The respondent has filed reply opposing the prayer made in the application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Once the main arbitration case has been dismissed as withdrawn on ground of territorial jurisdiction, there arises no occasion in the given facts to retain the amount deposited by the applicants/petitioners in this Court. Learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners has apprised that the applicants have taken recourse to Section 34 of the Act before the appropriate Court of Law. 6. In view of above, the application is allowed. The amount deposited by the applicants/petitioners in the Registry of this Court is ordered to be released in their favour alongwith upto date interest, subject to the applicants/petitioners furnishing their bank accounts details in the Registry of this Court within two weeks. The application stands disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 26, 2025 Judge Mukesh