2019 (5) TMI 1852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rial jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present petition. They submit that the Agreements between the parties which led to the dispute that has been adjudicated by the Award in question were executed in Kolkata; the registered office of the respondents is also in Kolkata and the land in relation to which the Agreements were executed is also in Kolkata. They submit that therefore, in terms of the Explanation to Section 47 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), it would only be the High Court of Calcutta that would have the jurisdiction to entertain the present petition. 3. They further submit that the petitioner had also filed an application under Section 9 of the Act before the High C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ve further submitted that as on today the Arbitral Award has not become enforceable inasmuch as the respondents have a period of 90 days from the receipt of the Award to challenge the same in terms of Article 34 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (hereinafter referred to as the 'UNCITRAL Model Law'). In this regard they place reliance on Section 48(1)(c) of the Act to contend that the Award which has not yet become binding on the parties cannot be enforced under Section 49 of the Act. 8. Prima facie I do not find any merit in the above submission. Article 34(3) of the UNCITRAL Model Law reads as under:- "Article 34: Application for setting aside as exclusive recourse against arbitral award xxxxxx (3) An ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the respondents. Section 48 of the Act gives the circumstances where the enforcement of a Foreign Award may be refused at the request of the party against whom it is invoked. As on date, the respondents are yet to file any application claiming such grounds. Unless such grounds are established, the Court has to prima facie assume that the Foreign Award that has been produced before it is capable of being enforced and therefore, grant interim protection in favour of the petitioner producing such an Award and seeking enforcement of the same. 12. The learned senior counsels for the respondents have further raised an objection on the Award being not enforceable as being violative of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and Section 74 of th....