OC 106 ORDER SHEET AP-COM/220/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL DIVISION UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS M/S POWER MOULD DAMAN AND ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR Date: 10th June, 2025. Appearance: Mr. Sidhartha Lahiri, Adv. Ms. Amrita Pandey, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharya, Adv. …for the respondent The Court: 1. AP-COM/220/2025 is an application for stay of enforcement of the award dated December 9, 2024. Mr. Lahiri submits that the award for a sum of Rs.4,28,290/- in favour of the respondents along with interest @ 12% per annum in case of non-payment within 30 days and an additional amount of Rs.50,000/- towards the arbitration proceeding was patently illegal. The award was passed on the basis of documents disclosed by the parties and the pleadings. However, the learned arbitrator failed to appreciate the pleadings and the documents 2 produced. Non-consideration of such documents amounted to patent illegality and perversity. According to the petitioner, the learned arbitrator did not appreciate that the time was the essence of the contract. After expiry of the delivery period, the petitioner was no longer obligated to accept the goods at the contractual rate. The learned arbitrator erred in not appreciating that the lower rate which was prevailing at the time of default should have been applied on defaulted supply. The respondents had accepted the lower rate which was offered to them. 2. Thus, Mr. Lahiri submits that the award should be stayed unconditionally, in view of the patent illegality which are apparent on the face of the award. 3. Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharya submits that this is not a case for unconditional stay of the award. Neither the agreement nor the award were creatures of fraud or corruption. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has to secure the awarded sum, in order to obtain stay of operation of the award. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and having considered the pleadings as also the law, this Court is of the view that the objections raised by Mr. Lahiri, are on the merits of the award. Such issues are to be decided in the application filed by the award- debtor under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. An award can be unconditionally stayed in case of two eventualities. First, when the arbitration agreement or the contract which formed the 3 basis of the award was a creature of fraud or corruption or secondly, when the making of the award was induced by fraud or corruption. The allegations of Mr. Lahiri is that the learned Arbitrator erred in not appreciating the evidence on record. Mr. Lahiri contends that the rights and obligation of the parties arising out of a contract, which expired due to efflux of time, were misinterpreted. 5. Under such circumstances, the prayer for unconditional stay is refused. The approximate calculation given by the award-holder of the dues payable as on date is Rs.4,94,000/-. The enforcement of the award shall remain unconditionally stayed for a period of four weeks. Within such period, a sum of Rs.4,94,000/- shall be deposited by the petitioners by a bank draft, before the learned Registrar, Original Side, High Court at Calcutta. Upon such deposit, the award shall remain unconditionally stayed till disposal of the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In case of default, the stay shall stand automatically vacated without further reference to this Court and the award-holder shall be at liberty to proceed with the execution. 6. The learned Registrar, Original Side, upon acceptance of the bank draft, shall encash the bank draft and deposit the amount in an interest bearing auto renewable fixed deposit, with any nationalized bank. 7. A copy of the bank draft that is to be deposited by the award- debtor/petitioner shall be supplied to the learned advocate-on-record for the award-holder to demonstrate compliance of this order. 4 8. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. (SHAMPA SARKAR, J.) B.Pal