Garnishee banks must deposit judgment-debtor funds up to the claimed execution amount.

An arbitral award dated 11 August 2021, which had attained finality after challenges under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and a special leave petition were rejected, held that the parties’ Joint Development Agreement was a revenue-sharing arrangement. It entitled the award holders to 22% of sale consideration from past and future sales in the ASV Alexandria project, with 12% interest from 9 August 2019, and directed the judgment debtor to render accounts

The award holders filed E.Ps. 89 and 92 seeking attachment and sale of properties, E.P. 90 seeking arrest of company officers, and E.P. 91 seeking restraint and deposit of funds held by banks.

They claimed that total project sales were about Rs.292.28 crore and that Rs.112.21 crore was due as of June 2026. The judgment debtor disputed the calculation, asserted that the award holders’ 22% share had not been quantified, and contended that cancellation of its power of attorney impeded sales of unsold flats.

Whether the award holders had established a sufficiently supported and crystallised monetary entitlement to obtain attachment and sale of the judgment debtor’s properties or arrest of its directors.

Whether the garnishee banks should be directed to deposit funds held in the judgment debtor’s accounts toward satisfaction of the award.

The Court considered the execution remedies sought under Order XXI Rules 54, 64 and 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, concerning attachment and sale of property, and Order XXI Rule 37 concerning arrest in execution.

It also proceeded on the basis that the final award established the award holders’ entitlement to a 22% revenue share and required the judgment debtor to render accounts.

No precedent or specific statutory provision governing the garnishee direction is identified in the order.

The Court found material uncertainty in the award holders’ calculation: the total sales claimed in execution exceeded the figures recorded in the award, and the award holders had not placed sufficient material to establish the claimed 22% entitlement of approximately Rs.68 crore or to substantiate their assertion that the remaining apartments had lost value.

It therefore declined the requested property attachment and sale and arrest relief. Separately, noting that Axis Bank had reported funds of over Rs.1 crore in accounts operated by the judgment debtor and that the other garnishees had furnished no details, the Court ordered the garnishees to deposit funds standing to the judgment debtor’s credit, subject to the stated limit.

In E.P. 91, respondents 2 to 8—the garnishees—were directed to deposit, within eight weeks of receiving the order, monies lying in their accounts to the credit of ASV Alexandria, limited to Rs.112,21,55,821, into the execution petition.