Ms Loknete Sundarraoji Solanke Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd Thru Secretary S B Lagad v. Ms Durga Chemicals Vivekanand Nagar Parli Vaijnath Dist Beed

2026:BHC-AUG:11035

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 920 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4807 OF 2025 IN ARBA/44/2024 M/s Loknete Sundarraoji Solanke Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Thru. Secretary S. B. Lagad

VERSUS

M/s. Durga Chemicals Through, Its Propritor Shubhangi Sujaysinh Mane ...

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Sharad Solanke Advocate for Respondents : Mr. Pravin Mengane h/f Mr. Suresh Dhole ...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

Dated : March 13, 2026 PER COURT :

1.

The application is filed for withdrawal of an amount of Rs.51,86,859/- with interest lying in the District Court at Kaij, District Beed, in M.C.A. No.79 of 2013 (old No.32 of 2022).

2.

The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had challenged the Award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the District Court. As a condition for entertaining the challenge to the Arbitral Award, the applicant was directed to deposit 75% of the awarded amount. 3.

It is further submitted that out of the amount so deposited, the appellant/non-applicant has already withdrawn 50% of the amount pursuant to orders passed by the District Court. The learned Counsel submits that the application filed by the applicant under Section 34 of the Act challenging the Arbitral Award has since been allowed by the District Court and the Award has been set aside. Against the said order, the present appeal/application has Page 1 of

920 CA 4807-2025 been filed by the non-applicant.

4.

The learned Counsel for the applicant therefore submits that, since the applicant has succeeded before the District Court and the Arbitral Award has been set aside, no liability survives against the applicant. Consequently, the amount deposited by the applicant before the District Court deserves to be returned to him. At this stage, he seeks permission to withdraw the remaining 50% of the deposited amount along with the interest accrued thereon lying in M.C.A. No.79 of 2013 (old No.32 of 2022). 5.

Since the Arbitral Award has been set aside by the District Court, the application deserves to be allowed. The applicant is therefore permitted to withdraw the amount deposited in M.C.A. No.79 of 2013 (old No.32 of 2022) along with the accrued interest thereon. 6.

In the event the appellant succeeds in the appeal, the amount withdrawn by the applicant shall be redeposited/paid back as may be directed by this Court. The application is disposed of. ( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) vj gawade/-.

Page 2 of