1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/46/2026 IA No.CAN/1/2026 The Director Vs M/s ABS Marine Services Pvt. Ltd Mr. V.D. Siva Balan … for the petitioner Mr. Mohammed Tabraiz … for the respondents September 2, 2026 [SR] Item No.16 1. The Director, Directorate of Shipping Services, Andaman and Nicobar Administration, being the Judgment Debtor has filed the instant application praying for a permission to the Judgment Debtor to deposit the entire awarded amount of Rs.3,13,34,114/- by way of Bank Guarantee or any other mode of deposit but not by way of fixed deposit, as directed by the learned Trial Court. 2. Submission of the petitioner is that it will cause serious prejudice to the Judgment Debtor if such huge amount is directed to be deposited by way of fixed deposit. 3. Learned advocate representing the Decree Holder vehemently opposes the submission and prayer of the petitioner. It has been submitted that the Judgment Debtor ought to secure the awarded amount as directed by the learned Trial Court. The award passed by the learned Trial Court has not been stayed by any competent judicial forum. 2 4. It has also been submitted that on repeated dates before the learned Trial Court, the Judgment Debtor sought accommodation for depositing the awarded amount but despite the same, the awarded amount has not been deposited. 5. It has been submitted that there is delay of nearly eleven

(11) months in filing the instant application. Prayer has been made to dismiss the same. 6. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and have perused the documents placed before the Court. 7. The copy of the orders passed by the learned Trial Court are annexed to the instant application. It appears therefrom that a money execution case No.2 of 2024 is pending consideration for a considerable period of time. Repeated adjournments were sought for on behalf of the Judgment Debtor for securing the awarded amount. Instead of securing the sum, the instant application has been filed seeking modification of the order directing the mode of securing the awarded amount. 8. It appears that on 22.11.2024, none appeared on behalf of the of Judgment Debtor, on 02.12.2025, an application under Order 21 Rule 26 of CPC was filed by the Judgment Debtor and accommodation was sought for by the learned advocate representing the Judgment Debtor. On 04.06.2025, prayer for adjournment on the ground of Judgment Debtor was allowed. 3 9. On 31.07.2025, the prayer for stay of the execution proceeding was filed which was allowed subject to depositing the full amount before the Judicial Cashier, District Court, Port Blair in the form of fixed deposit and the said amount was directed to be deposited till the disposal of the execution case.

10. On 04.09.2025, 10.10.2025, 12.11.2025, 02.12.2025, 11.12.2025, 06.01.2026, 06.02.2026 and 05.03.2026, prayer for adjournment was made by the learned advocate for the Judgment Debtor. 11. On 29.04.2026, prayer was made by the learned counsel for the Judgment Debtor seeking time for payment. The said prayer was allowed as last chance. 12. On 02.06.2026, an application under Order 21 Rule 41 (1) and (2) of the CPC was filed by the Decree Holder praying for declaration of assets by the Judgment Debtor. The application was fixed for hearing on 12.06.2026. On 12.06.2026, adjournment petition was filed by the Judgment Debtor. 13. The Court categorically noted that despite repeated liberty granted, the Judgment Debtor, with the intention to drag the matter, has filed an adjournment petition. After hearing the parties, the application under Order 21 Rule 41(1) and (2) of the CPC was allowed on contest. The Judgment Debtor was directed to file an affidavit stating the details of the assets along with statement of all bank accounts in India. 14. On 01.07.2026, learned counsel appearing for the Judgment Debtor filed a petition seeking fifteen days’ time for depositing the awarded amount. Though the prayer was 4 strongly objected to by the Decree Holder, the Court allowed the prayer as special last chance. Direction for furnishing the affidavit stating the particulars of assets was also allowed.

15. On 28.07.2026, accommodation was again prayed for by the learned advocate for the Judgment Debtor. On 11.08.2026, further prayer for adjournment was made by the learned advocate representing the Judgment Debtor. The matter is fixed before the learned Executing Court on 03.09.2026. 16. From the sequence of dates as mentioned herein above, it is evident that the Judgment Debtor prayed time before the learned Executing Court for depositing the awarded amount. Direction for depositing the awarded amount in the Judicial Cashier was passed on 31.07.2025. After consenting to deposit the awarded amount, the authority ought not to be permitted to seek modification of the mode of deposit. 17. For the purpose of securing the awarded amount, the learned Executing Court can always take a decision to restrain the Decree Holder from withdrawing the secured amount, in accordance with law. 18. The Judgment Debtor cannot be permitted to delay any further in depositing the secured amount as the same would cause extra burden upon the Judgment Debtor. The interest amount will keep on piling till the awarded amount is secured before the Executing Court. In the best interest of the Judgment Debtor, the awarded amount ought to be secured forthwith in accordance with the direction passed by the learned Executing Court. 5

19. In view of the discussions made herein above and considering the conduct of the Judgment Debtor, the Court is not inclined to modify the direction passed by the learned Executing Court on the application filed by the Judgment Debtor, that too, after such delayed point of time. 20. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected application is also dismissed. 21. All parties are directed to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Amrita Sinha, J. )

1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/46/2026 IA No.CAN/1/2026 The Director Vs M/s ABS Marine Services Pvt. Ltd Mr. V.D. Siva Balan … for the petitioner Mr. Mohammed Tabraiz … for the respondents September 2, 2026 [SR] Item No.16 1. The Director, Directorate of Shipping Services, Andaman and Nicobar Administration, being the Judgment Debtor has filed the instant application praying for a permission to the Judgment Debtor to deposit the entire awarded amount of Rs.3,13,34,114/- by way of Bank Guarantee or any other mode of deposit but not by way of fixed deposit, as directed by the learned Trial Court. 2. Submission of the petitioner is that it will cause serious prejudice to the Judgment Debtor if such huge amount is directed to be deposited by way of fixed deposit. 3. Learned advocate representing the Decree Holder vehemently opposes the submission and prayer of the petitioner. It has been submitted that the Judgment Debtor ought to secure the awarded amount as directed by the learned Trial Court. The award passed by the learned Trial Court has not been stayed by any competent judicial forum. 2 4. It has also been submitted that on repeated dates before the learned Trial Court, the Judgment Debtor sought accommodation for depositing the awarded amount but despite the same, the awarded amount has not been deposited. 5. It has been submitted that there is delay of nearly eleven

(11) months in filing the instant application. Prayer has been made to dismiss the same. 6. I have heard the submissions made on behalf of both the parties and have perused the documents placed before the Court. 7. The copy of the orders passed by the learned Trial Court are annexed to the instant application. It appears therefrom that a money execution case No.2 of 2024 is pending consideration for a considerable period of time. Repeated adjournments were sought for on behalf of the Judgment Debtor for securing the awarded amount. Instead of securing the sum, the instant application has been filed seeking modification of the order directing the mode of securing the awarded amount. 8. It appears that on 22.11.2024, none appeared on behalf of the of Judgment Debtor, on 02.12.2025, an application under Order 21 Rule 26 of CPC was filed by the Judgment Debtor and accommodation was sought for by the learned advocate representing the Judgment Debtor. On 04.06.2025, prayer for adjournment on the ground of Judgment Debtor was allowed. 3 9. On 31.07.2025, the prayer for stay of the execution proceeding was filed which was allowed subject to depositing the full amount before the Judicial Cashier, District Court, Port Blair in the form of fixed deposit and the said amount was directed to be deposited till the disposal of the execution case.

10. On 04.09.2025, 10.10.2025, 12.11.2025, 02.12.2025, 11.12.2025, 06.01.2026, 06.02.2026 and 05.03.2026, prayer for adjournment was made by the learned advocate for the Judgment Debtor. 11. On 29.04.2026, prayer was made by the learned counsel for the Judgment Debtor seeking time for payment. The said prayer was allowed as last chance. 12. On 02.06.2026, an application under Order 21 Rule 41 (1) and (2) of the CPC was filed by the Decree Holder praying for declaration of assets by the Judgment Debtor. The application was fixed for hearing on 12.06.2026. On 12.06.2026, adjournment petition was filed by the Judgment Debtor. 13. The Court categorically noted that despite repeated liberty granted, the Judgment Debtor, with the intention to drag the matter, has filed an adjournment petition. After hearing the parties, the application under Order 21 Rule 41(1) and (2) of the CPC was allowed on contest. The Judgment Debtor was directed to file an affidavit stating the details of the assets along with statement of all bank accounts in India. 14. On 01.07.2026, learned counsel appearing for the Judgment Debtor filed a petition seeking fifteen days’ time for depositing the awarded amount. Though the prayer was 4 strongly objected to by the Decree Holder, the Court allowed the prayer as special last chance. Direction for furnishing the affidavit stating the particulars of assets was also allowed.

15. On 28.07.2026, accommodation was again prayed for by the learned advocate for the Judgment Debtor. On 11.08.2026, further prayer for adjournment was made by the learned advocate representing the Judgment Debtor. The matter is fixed before the learned Executing Court on 03.09.2026. 16. From the sequence of dates as mentioned herein above, it is evident that the Judgment Debtor prayed time before the learned Executing Court for depositing the awarded amount. Direction for depositing the awarded amount in the Judicial Cashier was passed on 31.07.2025. After consenting to deposit the awarded amount, the authority ought not to be permitted to seek modification of the mode of deposit. 17. For the purpose of securing the awarded amount, the learned Executing Court can always take a decision to restrain the Decree Holder from withdrawing the secured amount, in accordance with law. 18. The Judgment Debtor cannot be permitted to delay any further in depositing the secured amount as the same would cause extra burden upon the Judgment Debtor. The interest amount will keep on piling till the awarded amount is secured before the Executing Court. In the best interest of the Judgment Debtor, the awarded amount ought to be secured forthwith in accordance with the direction passed by the learned Executing Court. 5

19. In view of the discussions made herein above and considering the conduct of the Judgment Debtor, the Court is not inclined to modify the direction passed by the learned Executing Court on the application filed by the Judgment Debtor, that too, after such delayed point of time. 20. The application, accordingly, stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected application is also dismissed. 21. All parties are directed to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Amrita Sinha, J. )