Rcm Infrastructure Limited vs The State Highway Authority Of … on 10 February, 2026

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Rcm Infrastructure Limited vs The State Highway Authority Of … on 10 February, 2026

Author: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

Bench: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

          ITEM NO.14                 COURT NO.5                   SECTION XVII-B


                              S U P R E M E   C O U R T    O F   I N D I A
                                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
          Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 26891/2024
          [Arising out of impugned final/interim judgment and order
          dated 30-09-2024 in CMP No. 24/2022 passed by the High Court
          of Jharkhand at Ranchi]
          RCM INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED                              Petitioner(s)
                                                VERSUS
          THE STATE HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF JHARKHAND                 Respondent(s)
          IA No. 260346/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF I/JUDGMENT,
          IA     No.     271374/2024    -     PERMISSION    TO     FILE
          ADDL.DOCS./FACTS/ANNEXURES


          Date : 10-02-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
          CORAM :
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE


          For Petitioner(s)         Mr. Debashish Bharuka, Sr.Adv.
                                    Mr. Raghvendra Srivastava, Sr.Adv.
                                    Mr. Sameer Ranjan Jha, Adv.
                                    Mr. Parth Jalan, Adv.
                                    Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv.
                                    Mr. Kumar Shivam, AOR


          For Respondent(s)       Mr. Avneesh Garg, Adv.
                                  Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
Nirmala Negi                      Mr. Rohit Rishi, Adv.
Date: 2026.02.12
16:42:53 IST
Reason:
                                  Ms. Anshul, Adv.
                                  Mr. Muddam Thirupathi Reddy, AOR
     UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                    O R D E R

1. The High Court by the order impugned before us

allowed an application under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India by directing that a contractual

clause1 requiring pre deposit before challenging an

arbitral award is not mandatory and therefore, set aside

the order of the Commercial Court directing deposit of the

award amount as per the contractual clause.

2. Having heard Mr. Debashish Bharuka and Mr.Raghvendra

Srivastava, senior counsels for the petitioner and

Mr.Avneesh Garg, counsel for the respondent, we are of the

opinion that the Special Leave Petition can be disposed of

by clarifying the following statutory regime under the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996:

1 “26.3.6 In the event the Party against whom the
Award has been granted challenges the Award for any reason
in a court of law, it shall make an interim payment to the
other Party for an amount equal to 75% (seventy five per
cent) of the Award, pending final settlement of the
Dispute. The aforesaid amount shall be paid forthwith upon
furnishing an irrevocable Bank Guarantee for a sum equal
to 120% (one hundred and twenty per cent) of the aforesaid
amount. Upon final settlement of the Dispute, the
aforesaid interim payment shall be adjusted and any
balance amount due to be paid or returned, as the case may
be, shall be paid or returned with interest calculated at
the rate of 10% (ten per cent) per annum from the date of
interim payment to the date of final settlement of such
balance.”

(i) An arbitral award shall be final and binding on the

parties and the persons claiming under them

respectively. [Section 35]

(ii) Immediately after the time for making an

application to set aside the award expires, the arbitral

award can be enforced like that of a Civil Court decree.

[Section 36(1)]

(iii) The award will continue to be enforceable as a

decree, even when an application to set aside the

arbitral award has been filed and pending. [Section

36(2)]

(iv) Enforceability of the award is subject to an

orders of stay, passed by a Court on an application made

for that purpose. [Section 36(2)]

(v) The power of the Court to stay the operation of an

award extends to imposing such conditions as it may deem

fit and as per the reasons supplied in the order.

[Section 36(2) and (3)]

(vi) The principles governing stay of a money decree

shall apply as Court considers an application for stay

of an arbitral award. [Section 36(3)]

3. The award in favour of the petitioner was passed on

10.06.2019. More than six and a half years have passed

since the petitioner had started objecting to the
maintainability of the Section 34 petition without pre

deposit. It is high time, the petitioner seeks execution

of the award.

4. While disposing of the Special Leave Petition, we

direct that, upon petitioner initiating enforcement of the

award under Section 36, the Court considering the

application(s) shall decide it as expeditiously as

possible. We also direct that the Court will decide the

application(s) without being influenced by the

observations made by the High Court in the order impugned

before us.

5. With these observations the Special Leave Petition

shall stands disposed of.

6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed

of.

(NIRMALA NEGI)                                  (NIDHI WASON)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                        ASSISTANT    REGISTRAR