MUKTA ARTS LIMITED, MUMBAI Vs. ANKIT FILMS, PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -Company, which was directed by the Arbitrator appointed under Arbitration Rules of Bihar Motion Pictures Association to pay to the opposite party a sum of Rs. Five lacs.

(2.) THERE was some dispute between M/s Ankit Films, Patna and M/s Mukta Arts Limited, Mumbai on premature telecast of a particular film as it does not appear denied that the terms of contract indicated that the film was never to be telecast prematurely and within five years of its release. It is not disputed that the film was telecast on a particular satelite channel before it was released for being shown in different Cinema Halls and, as such, M/s Ankit Films, Patna, i.e., opposite party herein, presented its dispute to the Arbitrators who were already existing under the Rules of Arbitration of the Bihar and Jharkhand Motion Pictures Association. By an award dated 25.6.2007 the Arbitrators held that the petitioner had breached the terms of contract by permitting the telecast of the film on a particular satelite channel and that caused a loss of business to the opposite party and directed the present petitioner to pay to the opposite party a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/ - (five lacs) within ninety days from the above date of award.

(3.) UNDISPUTEDLY , the award was put to execution after expiry of three months time as mandated by Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner appeared in Execution Case No. 12 of 2008, instituted before the Subordinate Judge -I, Patna, and filed a preliminary objection about its maintainability and sought an order of dismissal of the execution case. The Subordinate Judge -I, Patna after noticing arguments of the parties and the relevant provisions of the Act as also after perusing the decisions cited before him, dismissed the objection raised through two petitions and directed the continuance of the execution proceedings. The above order dated 20.3.2009 is being challenged in the present revision petition.