HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 10444 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. Heard Shri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ramanand Gupta, learned counsel for respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an award dated 13.03.2018 was passed in favor of the petitioner, against which the respondents filed a Misc. Case No. 5/2022, which was dismissed on 09.02.2023. Aggrieved against the said order, ARPLD No.242/2023 has been filed before this Court by the respondents, which is still pending before this Court, in which this Court vide its order dated 25.04.2023, directed to allot the regular number and further directed that the attachment of the account shall stand withdrawn provided the appellant depositing 50% of the total amount under the impugned award within two weeks and furnishing security for the remaining amount other than bank or cash guarantee. Further, the respondents by showing their inability in making compliance of the order dated 25.04.2023, moved a modification application, which was rejected by this Court on 31.05.2024. Thereafter, a time extension application was moved by the respondents for grant of further time to make compliance of the order dated 25.04.2023, which was disposed off by order dated 09.08.2024 in which the Court has specifically noted that almost 50% amount of the award i.e. Rs.2,50,33,316/- has been realized by attachment of the bank account of the appellants therein. Further, as the appellant therein were ready to furnish bank guarantee for the remaining amount, the order dated 25.04.2023 was modified to the extent that the appellants therein furnish bank guarantee for the remaining amount under the impugned award within six weeks, and further, the execution of the award shall remain in abeyance. Further, in the order dated 09.08.2024, it has been directed that on furnishing of such bank guarantee, the execution of award shall remain stayed. Thereafter, in compliance of the order dated 09.08.2024, the respondents furnish a bank guarantee, which was rejected by the Commercial Court on the pretext that the bank guarantee was not of the 50% of the amount to which again, an appeal was moved in which by order dated 29.11.2024, the Court held that Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aklank Kumar Jain, Swapnil Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ramanand Gupta M/S Adinath Builders .....Petitioner(s) Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad Etah And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) on the appellant furnishing additional undertaking for amount other than bank or cash guarantee, so far as interest part is concerned, it will be subject to the satisfaction of the Commercial Court in form of cash or bank guarantee, the account shall stand released from attachment. Shri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that once a bank guarantee submitted by the respondents was rejected, the petitioner was required to submit bank guarantee as well as furnish additional undertaking for the interest amount, which has not been done till date and on the contrary, the Commercial Court has stayed the execution proceedings without there being any compliance made by the respondents. In view of the above, Shri Swapnil Kumar is directed to supply a paper-book to Mr. Ashish Mishra, Advocate, who appears for the Allahabad High Court, during the course of the day, who shall take instructions in the matter by the next date fixed. List on 11.09.2025, as fresh. When the matter is next listed, name of Mr. Ashish Mishra (AOR No.A/A1303/12) be shown in the cause list as learned counsel appearing for the Allahabad High Court. September 4, 2025 Pravesh Mishra A227 No. 10444 of 2025 2 (Piyush Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad