OCD-1 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) ORIGINAL SIDE EC-COM/349 OF 2026 THE OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE OCEAN VESSEL ESPERANZA III VS TATA STEEL LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHERJEE Date: 30th September, 2026. APPEARANCE: Mr.Krishnaraj Thaker, Sr. Adv. Mr. Biswaroop Mukhrjee, Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Prasad, Adv. For decree holder Mr. Deepan Kumar Sarkar, Adv. Mr. Jaydeb Ghorai, Adv. Mr. Diptesh Ghorai, Adv. Mr. Saugata Banerjee, Adv. For Tata Steel Limited THE COURT: The judgment debtor has calculated the amount payable to the decree holder for full and final settlement of the execution case by satisfying the decree. As per computation, a sum of Rs.2,23,28,270.49 is due and payable by the judgment debtor to satisfy the decree. The decree holder does not dispute the computation as they have already 2 cross checked the same. The judgment debtor has carried to the Court a “PAYINST DRAFT” dated 29th September, 2026 bearing No.642998 and drawn on HDFC Bank for being handed over to the decree holder. The decree holder says that since the decree holder is a German entity and does not have any bank account in India at the present, it will be difficult for them to encash the PAYINST DRAFT. It is to be noted that the decree holder, through its advocate-on-record, by a letter dated 29th September, 2026 had informed the advocate-on-record for the judgment debtor regarding the account details of the decree holder and the name in which the draft is required to be made. The decree holder, however, did not point out this difficulty to the judgment debtor or to the Court on any earlier occasion. The letter dated 29th September, 2026 is kept with the record. The decree holder says that in the event the money is transmitted in the bank account of the decree holder as indicated in the said letter it will simplify the procedure. The judgment debtor, however, submits that if this procedure had to be adopted the decree holder could have informed them because to prepare the draft and to again get it cancelled is not only inconvenient but also will require the judgment debtor to incur changes. The decree holder agrees to have the commission and cancellation charges, if any be deducted from the payment to be made to the decree holder. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, a photocopy of the draft is retained with the records and the original draft is returned to the advocate for 3 the judgment debtor. The judgment debtor shall after deducting the commission and cancellation charges as applicable on actual basis remit the balance sum from out of Rs.2,23,28,270.49 or sum equivalent in Euro on the basis of the conversion rate as applicable today(30/09/2026). The payment has to be made by 7th October, 2026. Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this execution application, the same stands disposed of. The parties will be at liberty to mention the matter in the event the judgment-debtor does not make payment as directed or to remove any other difficulty. (ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.) Sb/