: 1 : chs-1570-10=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1570 OF 2010 IN EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 640 OF 2010 IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS NO. 1 OF 2009 Moneyline Credit Ltd. .. Claimant / J.C. v/s. Kokila Bhagwanjji Thakkar & Ors. .. Borrowers/ J.D. ......... Mr. Omar Khaiyam Shaik a/w. Vikas Salvi i/b M/s. Vikas Salvi and Associates for claimant Mr. U.S. Rao for the aplicant in CHS. Mr. Atul Rajadhyaksha, Sr. Counsel appointed as Amicus Curie ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 23rd NOVEMBER, 2010 P.C. : 1. Yesterday ad-interim application in terms of prayer clause (c) was made by the learned Counsel for the applicant. I thought it fit to appoint learned Senior Counsel Mr. Rajadhyaksha to assist the Court as the point involved was fairly peculiar and I was of the view that it would be proper to appreciate the points involved in the matter. Learned Counsel Mr. Rajadhyaksha submitted to the Court that if the plaintiffs are to be treated as a bank or financial institution within the meaning of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 : 2 : chs-1570-10=.sxw (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), proceeding to recover the money by way of arbitration may not be applicable. 2. Thereafter, I have heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants on the relevant question as to whether plaintiffs are to be treated as bank or financial institution within the meaning of Section 2(b) and 2(h) respectively of the said Act. Learned Counsel for the applicant could not point out to the Court as to why he would like to say that plaintiffs should be treated as the bank or financial institution within the meaning of the said Act. On the basis of this, I was inclined to reject ad-interim application and I had indicated to the learned Counsel for the applicants that the applicants will have to institute appropriate proceedings so as to challenge the award which is sought to be executed. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants upon instructions stated that applicants would be interested in challenging the award being award dated 19th March, 2010 by filing appropriate proceedings. He submitted that further execution of the decree be stayed for a period of 4 weeks. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs left it to the Court as regards request of stay. 3. In my view, the applicants can take steps to file appropriate proceedings so as to challenge an award and that it would be proper if : 3 : chs-1570-10=.sxw further proceedings in the execution application be stayed for a period of 10 days from today. On hearing this, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs upon instructions made a statement that plaintiffs shall not take further steps in execution proceedings till 6th December, 2010. Statement made by learned Counsel for plaintiffs is required to be noted. The plaintiffs will have to be compensated in the nature of costs and according to me in the facts and circumstances of the case, Rs.2,000/- if awarded in this chamber summons would meet the ends of justice. In view of the above, chamber summons is disposed of by passing following order. ORDER (i) Chamber summons is allowed to be withdrawn. (ii) The applicants are at liberty to take out appropriate proceedings to challenge an award dated 19th March, 2010. Statement made by learned Counsel for the plaintiffs that plaintiffs shall not take further steps in execution of the award dated 19th March, 2010 till 6th December, 2010 is accordingly noted. (iii) Applicants to pay to the plaintiffs costs of Rs.2,000/-. Cost, condition precedent for further proceedings. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)