Cinepolis INDIA PVT LTD vs. Sarita Multiplexes PVT LTD

Facts

These proceedings involve two enforcement applications filed by Cinepolis India Private Limited (Decree Holder/Judgement Debtor) and Sarita Multiplexes Private Limited (Decree Holder/Judgement Debtor) concerning an Award dated 07.02.2024. The Award directed Cinepolis to pay occupation charges, including GST, to Sarita for a specific period, and also entitled Cinepolis to a refund of Rs. 4,46,22,050/- (later corrected to Rs.4,63,50,980/-) deposited with the Court, along with accrued interest. This deposit was made pursuant to earlier High Court and Arbitral Tribunal orders. The parties, through their counsel, have arrived at a consent order to dispose of both enforcement proceedings.

Held

The Court held that the parties, through their learned counsel, had arrived at a consent order for the disposal of both enforcement proceedings. The Court accepted the agreed-upon directions for the disbursement of the amount deposited with the Court. Specifically, Rs.1,23,15,892/- was to be released to Sarita, inclusive of GST and after deducting TDS, with Cinepolis responsible for depositing the TDS amount with tax authorities and issuing a statutory certificate. Sarita was also to appropriate Rs.55,00,000/- as security deposit. The remaining balance amount, along with accrued interest, was to be released to Cinepolis. The Court found that upon implementation of these directions, the Award dated 07.02.2024 would stand fully satisfied. The ratio decidendi is that consent terms arrived at by parties through their counsel, which are clear and unambiguous, will be given effect to by the Court for the disposal of enforcement proceedings, provided they are lawful.

Key Issues

1. Whether the parties' consent to the proposed directions for the disposal of the enforcement proceedings is valid and binding? 2. How should the amount deposited with the Court be disbursed between Sarita Multiplexes Private Limited and Cinepolis India Private Limited, considering the terms of the Award and the parties' agreement? Petitioner/Appellant (Cinepolis) and Revenue/State (Sarita) arguments: The judgment records that the learned counsel for both parties, upon instructions, submitted that both enforcement proceedings may be disposed of by consent with specific directions. No specific arguments were recorded for either party in opposition or support of any particular interpretation of the Award or statutory provisions. The parties have agreed to a specific disbursement plan for the deposited amount, which includes releasing a portion to Sarita, appropriating a security deposit, and releasing the balance to Cinepolis along with interest. The parties have also agreed on the handling of TDS and its deposit with tax authorities.