M/s Kripa Road Lines Pvt Ltd A Registered Partnership Firm, Having Its Office v. M/s National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd Sipat Super Thermal Power Project At Ujjwal
Case Details
Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.08.06 14:40:33 +0530 1 2025:CGHC:38266 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 737 of 2025 M/s Kripa Road Lines Pvt Ltd A Registered Partnership Firm, Having Its Office At Near, S B I, Sarkanda Branch, Bilaspur, C.G., Through One Of Its Partner- Mr. Shrawan Kumar Soni, S/o Santosh Soni, Aged About 38 Years, R/o- Telipara, District- Bilaspur, C.G. (Award- Debtor) ... Petitioner(s) versus M/s National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd Sipat Super Thermal Power Project At Ujjwal Nagar, Sipat, District- Bilaspur, C.G. (Award- Holder) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Aseem Bhagwat Gopal, Advocate For Respondent : Dr. Nirmal Shukla, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 04-08-2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- 10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set-aside the impugned Order dated 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Commercial Court (District Judge Level), Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) in Execution Case no. 05/2018 and any consequential proceeding arising therefrom. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate. 2 2) Facts of the present case are that the parties herein entered into an agreement for loading and transportation of coal, and there was a dispute with regard to the demand of Rs. 27 lakhs by the respondent. Respondent [award-holder] invoked arbitration clause and filed a claim before the Sole Arbitrator and an ex-parte award was passed on 08.10.2016 whereby the petitioner [award-debtor] was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,05,82,962/- with interest @ 10% p.a. Against the said award, the petitioner preferred an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned Commercial Court (District Judge Level), Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) and the said application was dismissed vide order dated 23.12.2017. 3) Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an arbitral appeal before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, and the same is pending consideration. Meanwhile, the respondent initiated the execution proceedings for the recovery of the award amount, and it was registered as Execution Case No. 05/2018 before the learned Commercial Court (District Judge Level), Naya Raipur. It is pertinent to mention that earlier, the execution proceeding was dismissed in default and for non-compliance with the orders passed by the learned Commercial Court. Later on, it was restored, and a notice was served upon the petitioner to appear before the learned Court below on 09.08.2024. 4) Petitioner submitted a proposal for payment of the decretal amount in instalments and on 17.10.2024, deposited Rs. 30 lakhs into the account of the respondent. Vide order dated 17.10.2024, the learned Court below directed the petitioner to furnish the details of his assets 3 on an affidavit. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an affidavit on 26.10.2024 in the prescribed proforma and on 08.01.2025, the petitioner submitted a revised proposal for payment of Rs. 20 lakhs per month towards the satisfaction of the award amount. Thereafter, Rs. 20 lakhs were deposited into the account of the respondent. On 14.01.2025, the respondent agreed to accept the revised payment schedule for monthly instalments and till date, Rs. 1.9 Crore has already been paid. 5) Respondent filed an application under Order 21 Rule 46 of CPC on 22.03.2025 for impleading M/s Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd. (BALCO), Korba (C.G.) as “Garnishee” for satisfaction of the arbitral award on the basis of the affidavit dated 26.10.2024 filed by the petitioner, wherein it is mentioned that a debt of more than Rs. 2 Crore is due against M/s BALCO, Korba. Learned Commercial Court issued notice to M/s BALCO, Korba. Subsequently, an affidavit was filed by M/s BALCO, Korba on 30.06.2025 wherein any financial liability was denied. 6) Learned Court in the impugned order dated 15.07.2025 held that the award-debtor miserably failed to place on record any document substantiating any liability of M/s BALCO, Korba. It is further stated that a copy of the agreement executed way back in the year 2009 is available on the record, and there is no document to establish the outstanding amount. Learned Commercial Court further held that furnishing of false information on affidavit by the award-debtor amounts to perjury punishable under Sections 212 and 227 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 229 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in conjunction with Section 215 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and took a decision to proceed against the 4 petitioner for making false statement on oath for the purpose of influencing court proceedings. 7) Mr. Y.C. Sharma, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner [award-debtor], submits that the petitioner was paying monthly instalments of Rs. 20 lakhs as his proposal was accepted by the respondent. He further submits that the application under Order 21 Rule 46 of CPC was moved by the respondent and thereafter, pursuant to the order passed by the learned Commercial Court, an affidavit was submitted before the Court wherein it was disclosed that M/s BALCO, Korba has to pay a sum of Rs. 2 Crores to the petitioner as an agreement was entered into between them on 13.10.2009. He contends that the learned Commercial Court, without giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed the order and took a decision to initiate the proceedings for perjury against the petitioner. He prays to quash the part of the order impugned whereby criminal proceedings have been contemplated against the petitioner. 8) On the other hand, Dr. Nirmal Shukla, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, submits that the petitioner furnished false information on the affidavit where it put forth the unfounded story of money owed by M/s BALCO, Korba, whereas there was no transaction at all between them. He further submits that though the petitioner was afforded sufficient opportunity, it failed to establish whether on the date of the submission of the affidavit, any amount was payable by M/s BALCO, Korba to the petitioner or not. He contends that the petitioner furnished false information on the affidavit; therefore, the learned Court below rightly initiated a proceeding for perjury. He prays that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 5 9) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on the record. 10) Evidently, the petitioner filed an affidavit before the learned Court below and in its para-4, it is stated as under:- 4. In addition to the aforesaid, I say that all efforts are being made by me to obtain the amount of Rs. 2 crores which is due to me by M/s. BALCO, Korba. Further, I say that, in the eventuality of successfully receiving the said due amount from the M/s. BALCO, I would promptly deposit the said amount before this Hon'ble Court in execution of the Award. 11) A show-cause notice was issued to M/s BALCO, Korba, and it filed a reply to the said notice. In the affidavit dated 08.05.2025, M/s BALCO, Korba, stated that it does not owe any money to M/s Kripa Road Lines Pvt. Ltd. as alleged. This statement was made after verification of the records of M/s BALCO, Korba. It was also stated that the claim made by the petitioner is factually incorrect. Another affidavit was filed by M/s BALCO, Korba on 30.06.2025 wherein it was stated that the award debtor did not file any supporting documents along with the show- cause notice, as a result of which Bharat Aluminium Company Limited could not trace the vendor code or any other document relating to the alleged transaction. 12) In para-3 of the said affidavit, M/s BALCO, Korba, admitted that the agreement bears the letterhead of M/s BALCO, Korba, but the remaining documents relate to correspondences and transactions with Vedanta Aluminium Limited, Lanjigarh, and it was not in a position to verify or clarify the transactions concerning other entities. In this affidavit, M/s BALCO, Korba has not outrightly rejected the factum of the agreement between the parties. 6 13) In such a situation, the learned Commercial Court ought to have provided the opportunity to M/s BALCO, Korba, to place on record the material documents to deny the liability part as stated by the petitioner in the affidavit. Instead, the learned Court below has initiated a proceeding for perjury and in the opinion of this Court, the same is not sustainable in the eyes of the law. 14) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts and the submissions made by counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the part of the order impugned dated 15.07.2025 whereby a criminal proceeding for perjury has been initiated, is hereby set-aside. 15) At this stage, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions, submits that as and when the petitioner would get the amount of Rs. 2 Crores from M/s BALCO, Korba, it will satisfy the award amount out of that fund and foremost.
Decision
16) Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya