A Delhi court has ordered the attachment of Bikaner House, owned by the Nagar Palika Nokha of Rajasthan, after the state municipal council failure to pay dues of Rs 50.31 lakh it owed to a private firm.
The Patiala House Court noted that despite numerous opportunities, the judgment debtor (Nagar Palika Nokha) had failed to provide an affidavit of assets.
The Nokha civic body had failed to settle an arbitral award of Rs 50.31 lakh, passed in January 2020 in favour of private company Enviro Infra Engineers Private Limited.
Agreeing with the submissions made on behalf of Decree Holder (DH), the court said it was a fit case for issuance of warrants of attachment against the immovable property of the judgment debtor, namely Bikaner House, New Delhi.
The Nagar Palika Nokha was directed not to transfer or charge the specified property by way of sale, gift or otherwise, until further court orders.
The judge further directed the judgment debtor to remain present before the court on the next date of hearing, and listed the matter for November 29.
Recently, the Himachal Pradesh High Court had ordered the attachment of Himachal Bhawan, situated at 27-Sikandra Road, Mandi House, New Delhi, over the failure of the state government to refund Rs 64 crore with interest to Seli Hydro Electric Power Company Limited.
On January 13, 2023, the High Court had directed the Himachal Pradesh government to refund an up-front premium of Rs 64 crore deposited by the petitioner, along with 7 percent interest per annum, from the date of filing the petition until its realisation.
The High Court had passed the order on a writ petition filed by Seli Hydro Electric Power Company Limited.
The State of Himachal Pradesh sought relief in the order through a letter patent appeal. The Division Bench then granted interim protection to the state government, directing it to deposit the awarded amount, along with the accrued interest to the petitioner.
However, despite extensions, the state government failed to deposit the amount. On July 15, 2024, the Division Bench vacated its interim protection. The petitioner subsequently initiated execution proceedings, seeking enforcement of the award.
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel observed that since there was no interim protection in favour of the respondents-State, the award had to be implemented, more so for the reason that delay in deposit of the award amount by the State was entailing interest on a daily basis, which had to be paid from the public exchequer.
The High Court further granted liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps for auction.
The High Court also directed the Principal Secretary (MPP & Power) to conduct a fact-finding inquiry to identify the officers responsible for the omission and recover the interest personally from the erring officials.
The single-judge Bench directed the Principal Secretary (MPP & Power) to submit the enquiry report within 15 days and listed the matter for further hearing on December 6.