1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.13 OF 2008 Solapur Municipal Corporation .. Appellant Versus M/s.Garuda Aviation Service Pvt.Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.Nitin Jamdar for appellant Mr.V.J.Hegde for respondent CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 2nd May 2009. P.C. . Heard Mr.Jamdar for appellant and Mr.Hegde for respondent. Admit. Mr.Hegde waives service for the respondent. Call for records and proceedings. Hearing expedited. 2 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14 OF 2008 IN ARBITRATION APPEAL NO.13 OF 2008 Solapur Municipal Corporation .. Appellant Versus M/s.Garuda Aviation Service Pvt.Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.Nitin Jamdar for appellant Mr.V.J.Hegde for respondent CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 2nd May 2009. P.C. . Heard learned Counsel for parties. Perused the application. The award has been upheld. The Award arises out of a contract awarded to the respondent for collection of octroi. According to the appellant, the contractor was to deposit a periodical sum which he has failed to do despite extensions being 3 granted. The contract was for a specific period. The contract having come to an end, according to Mr.Jamdar, until this Court determines as to whether the learned Judge was right in refusing to set aside the Award, its enforcement and implementation must be stayed. 2. Mr.Jamdar states that the appeal is admitted and thus, a strong prima facie case is made out. The appellant is a public body and there is no question of it not complying with the final order of this Court in the appeal. Ultimately, valuable public funds will be lost if any order of deposit is made. Thus, balance of convenience is also in favour of the appellant. On the other hand, Mr.Hegde submits that the Award has been made by the Arbitrator on 11th August 2005 and the Award directs payment of Rs.4 Crores plus interest to the respondent claimant. The arbitration petition was dismissed by the Court below on 14th January 2008. For all these 4 years nothing has been paid to respondent and, therefore, the Award be permitted to be enforced and implemented. 3. After having heard both sides, in my view, interest of justice would be sub-served if the execution and enforcement of the award is stayed on the following terms:- (a) That the appellant shall deposit in this Court a sum of Rs.2 Crores within a period of 16 weeks from today. If this condition is complied with, this civil application is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b); (b) If there is default, then, needless to clarify that the civil application shall stand dismissed without any further reference to Court; 5 4. This order is passed considering the claims of both sides so also to balance the equities. In my view, complete stay of the Award, after challenge to the same has been rejected, is not permissible in the facts peculiar to this case. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)