1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.295 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.296 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.297 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.298 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.382 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.383 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.384 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.385 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.386 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.387 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.388 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.389 OF 2010, EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.390 OF 2010, AND EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO.391 OF 2010 ______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s Orders appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Prothonotary’s orders Mr.Samir Suryavanshi i/by M.B.Kale for the claimant. CORAM : R.S.MOHITE, J. DATE : 8th JULY 2010. P.C.: . The matters are moved for dispensing with an objection relating to furnishing of certificate under Order XXI, Rule 6(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The certificate is required to set forth that the satisfaction of the decree has not been obtained by execution within the jurisdiction of the Court by which it was passed. The contention is that in the 2 present case the execution is of an award passed under the new Arbitration Act. Reliance is placed upon a judgment passed by the Delhi High Court in the case of Daelim Industrial Company Ltd Vs. Numaligarh Refinery Ltd passed on 13th March 2009 in Execution Application No.105 of 2009 wherein in paragraph 25 a view has been taken that transfer certificate is not required for execution of an award under the Arbitration Act. In this view of the matter, the objection is dispensed with. Some of the aforesaid matters are not listed today but the papers are called for since they involve the same point. (R.S.MOHITE, J)