Calcutta High Court Cat'S Whiskers Pvt. Ltd vs G D Engineering Co (India) Pvt. Ltd on 27 February, 2024 OCD28 ORDER SHEET EC/237/2023 IA NO: GA/1/2023, GACOM/2/2024 Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE (Commercial Division) CAT'S WHISKERS PVT. LTD. VS G D ENGINEERING CO (INDIA) PVT. LTD. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA Date : 27th February, 2024. Appearance: Mr. Priyankar Saha, Adv. Mr. Arindam Samanta, Adv. Mr. Hemant Tiwari, Adv. ..for the decreeholder Mr. Sakya Sen, Adv. Mr. Sukrit Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Amritam Mandal, Adv. Ms. Ananya Chakraborty, Adv. Ms. Shipra Naskar, Adv. ...for the awarddebtor The Court: The Court was under a mistaken belief on the last occasion, i.e., on 22nd February, 2024, that the awarddebtor had complied with the statutory mandate of Section 19 of the MSMED Act, 2006. This fact was brought to the Court's notice after close of arguments on that day and learned counsel for the awarddebtor was requested to address on Section 19 of the MSMED Act today. 2 It became evident today that the awarddebtor has continued filing one proceeding after another in challenge to the Award without complying with the statutory mandate under the MSMED Act. Learned counsel appearing for the awarddebtor seeks to justify the non compliance on the ground that the stage for compliance has passed since the stated position of the awarddebtor is that the Award is now ripe for execution. The awarddebtor has made two applications for dismissal of the execution petition filed by the awardholder and for declaring that the impugned Award is a nullity. The statutory basis for making these applications is Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, more specifically, that this Court lacks jurisdiction to execute the Award. After prodding by the Court to address on Section 19 of the MSMED Act, counsel submits that there is no requirement of statutory compliance of Section 19 since the awarddebtor does not dispute the fact that the Award is ready for execution. This stand would however be belied by the two applications filed by the awarddebtor which seeks to put the brakes in the momentum of the execution of the Award by questioning the jurisdiction of the executing Court. Counsel thereafter takes the point of the Chartered Accountant's calculation of the interestcomponent of the Award under Section 16 of the MSMED Act to be a delegated function which was held to be of questionable import in Government of Maharashtra vs. Shrivin Pharma Pvt. Ltd. (AP 90 of 2023): 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 3482. 3 The relevant facts, first. The impugned Award, which is now before the Court for execution, is dated 25th September, 2019. By the said Award the Council assessed the principal amount to be Rs.12,13,174/ + interest at three times of the Bank rate of RBI compounded with monthly rests. The calculation was to be made under Section 16 of the MSMED Act. The Chartered Accountant's certificate is of 21st February, 2023 and calculated the interest approximately at Rs.37.39 lakhs which made the total award being approximately Rs.49.52 lakhs. Hence, as of 21st February, 2023, the awarddebtor was indebted to the petitioner/ awardholder for an amount of approximately Rs.49.52 lakhs. Although the Court doubted total delegation to a Chartered Accountant for calculating the interest component to an award in Government of Maharashtra, there cannot be any doubt of the scope or mandate of Section 19 of the MSMED Act. Section 19 constitutes a bar on the Court from entertaining any challenge to an award passed by the Facilitation Council without requiring the awarddebtor, who is not the supplier, to deposit 75% of the awarded amount. The language of Section 19 mentions the words "...amount