The High Court held that the appeals against orders in proceedings for execution or enforcement of arbitral awards are not maintainable. The doctrine of res judicata or principles analogous to it apply, as the issue of maintainability was previously decided. Even independent of res judicata, the appeals are not maintainable because the execution proceedings were under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA), not the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Section 37 of the ACA governs the appealability, being a special enactment prevailing over the CPC. The court affirmed the binding precedent that such proceedings arise u/s 36 of the ACA, not Order XXI CPC. The appeals cannot be maintained u/ss 13 or 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act read with Order XVIII CPC. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, with costs imposed on the appellants.
The High Court held that the appeals against orders in proceedings for execution or enforcement of arbitral awards are not maintainable. The doctrine of res judicata or principles analogous to it apply, as the issue of maintainability was previously decided. Even independent of res judicata, the appeals are not maintainable because the execution proceedings were under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (ACA), not the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Section 37 of the ACA governs the appealability, being a special enactment prevailing over the CPC. The court affirmed the binding precedent that such proceedings arise u/s 36 of the ACA, not Order XXI CPC. The appeals cannot be maintained u/ss 13 or 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act read with Order XVIII CPC. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, with costs imposed on the appellants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
