The Supreme Court in the case of Chakardhari Sureka vs. Prem Lata Sureka through Spa & Ors., recently clarified that the execution of an arbitral award cannot be stalled merely on the ground that an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is pending. The Apex court emphasised that the pendency of a Section 37 appeal does not, by itself, operate as a stay against the execution of an arbitral award.

The ruling addressed a situation where the appellant (award-holder) approached the Supreme Court after the Delhi High Court decided to adjourn execution proceedings solely because the respondents (judgment-debtors) had filed a Section 37 appeal against the dismissal of their Section 34 objections. Setting aside the High Court’s decision, the Apex Court stressed that the award-holder retains the right to proceed with execution unless there is an express interim order staying enforcement.

The Supreme Court observed that it is improper for the Execution Court to defer considering the execution application and any objections thereto only because a Section 37 appeal is pending, especially when there is no interim order operating against the award. Consequently, the Court held that the Execution Court shall be free to proceed with the execution of the award in accordance with law, subject only to any interim order passed in the pending Section 37 appeal. Objections regarding the executability of the award must be addressed by the Execution Court in accordance with the law after giving a hearing opportunity to the parties concerned.