Disposed

Sunil Puri v. Hbs Realtors Private Limited

Bombay HC20 Dec 2024COMEX/26/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This one-line order disposes of a commercial execution application where the award debtor paid the cost component of the award. The court marked that specific part of the award as satisfied, discharged warrants of attachment, and lifted attachments on two properties, granting liberty to file a fresh execution application for other unsatisfied parts of the award.

What did the court decide?

Execution application disposed; part of award marked satisfied; warrants of attachment discharged and attachments on two properties lifted.

Sunil Puri vs Hbs Realtors Private Limited — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

COMEX 26-24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

COMMERCIAL EXECUTION APPLICAITON NO. 26 OF 2024

¶4

Sunil Puri ...Applicant V/s. HBS Realtors Pvt. Ltd. ...Defendant

¶5

Mr. Hrushi Narvekar with Ms. Shaheda Madraswala and Mr. Akshat Tiwari i/b Vashi and Vashi for the Applicant.

¶6

Mr. Ashwin Shete with Mr. Rishi Patodia i/b Jayakar and Partners for the Respondent.

¶7

When the matter is called out, Mr. Shete, learned Counsel

¶8

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2024.12.20 18:44:28 +0530

¶9

appears for the Award Debtor and submits that as far as the cost as directed in the award dated 26^th October, 2022 is concerned, he is handing over the Demand Draft for a sum of Rs. 71,51,699.16 to Mr. Narvekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Award Creditor and that, therefore, the present Execution Application may accordingly be diposed for marking the award partially satisfied in terms of Clause (D) of paragraph 277 of the award.

¶10

Mr. Narvekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant

¶11

accepts the said Demand Draft and submits that as far as the operative

¶12

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

¶13

COMEX 26-24.doc

¶14

part of the award at paragraph 277(D) is concerned, the same can be marked as satisfied. That this Execution Application can also be accordingly disposed, however, submitting that as far as the operative part (A), (B) and (C) of the said paragraph 277 is concerned, this Court may grant liberty to take out appropriate Execution Application in the event of the non compliance of the same.

¶15

Having heard the learned Counsel and having considered their submissions, this Court records that in view of the aforesaid, the operative part (D) of paragraph 277 of the award is satisfied. This Execution Application accordingly stands disposed. Warrants of attachment dated 2^nd July, 2024 to accordingly stand discharged. The attachments on the following two properties are hereby raised/lifted:-

¶16

505, Ceejay House, Shiv Sagar Estate, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018, bearing C. S. No. 1/3.

¶17

61-Landmark, Carmichel Road, Mumbai-400 026.

¶18

Liberty to the Award Creditor to take out appropriate Execution

¶19

Application with respect to the paragraph 277(A), (B) and (C) of the award, if the need arisen.

¶20

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶21

Nikita Gadgil

¶22

2/2

Sunil Puri v. Hbs Realtors Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Puri v. Hbs Realtors Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Official Liquidator of Swadeshi Mills Company Ltd. vs B. I. F. R. (Petitioner)

Bharat Udayog Limited vs Mahrashtra Industrial Devlopment Corporation

Jayesh Sanghrajka vs Sudhakar Shetty

Rameshwar Nath Shukla vs Asha Suresh Verma and 2 Ors.

Official Liquidator of Pamwi Tissues Ltd. (in Liquidation) vs B.I.F.R. (Petitioner)

Vbg Reality LLP vs Ms Maa Ashapura Developers