High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 DEL CK 5819

Den Network Ltd. & Anr. vs Aerolex Cable Net & Anr.

Delhi High Court, New Delhi · Decided on 30 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Om Prakash Shukla, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
EX.P. 23/2020 & EX.APPL.(OS) 286/2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 285 words
1.

It appears that the arbitral award sought to be enforced does not bear adequate stamp duty as per the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as applicable in NCT of Delhi1.

2.

It is trite that an insufficiently stamped instrument cannot be enforced. It is also well-settled that the aspect of stamp duty is a curable defect. However, the defect shall be cured in accordance with the Act.

3.

In view thereof, this Court issued practice directions dated 13.07.2026, by which one last indulgence was granted for four weeks whereby the Decree Holder ought to deposit sufficient stamp duty along with penalty, if any, on the award sought to be enforced.

4.

This time period has come to an end on 13.08.2026, hence no further indulgence can be granted.

5.

Section 33 of the Act imposes a duty upon this Court to impound an inadequately stamped instrument, i.e., arbitral award in the present case. Section 35 further prohibits this Court from acting upon such an insufficiently stamped award.

6.

Accordingly, the arbitral award is liable to be impounded under Section 33 of the Act.

7.

At this stage, learned Counsel appearing for the Decree Holder submits that amount has already been deposited to secure stay in OMP (COMM) 195/2022 which is arising out of the arbitral award dated 11.03.2015 sought to be enforced herein. Therefore, no purpose would be served to keep this enforcement petition pending.

8.

Accordingly, he seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file it again as and when situation arises and after making stamp duty sufficient as per the Act.

9.

Leave and liberty as aforesaid is granted.

10.

The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

1 “Act” hereinafter