Delhi High Court Blocks ₹213 Crore Release To British Marine Over Unstamped Arbitral Award Against SAIL
The Delhi High Court has refused to release the remaining ₹213.24 crore deposited by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in enforcement proceedings initiated by British Marine PLC. The court held that the arbitral award could not be executed while it remained unstamped and the original award was not available before it.
Justice Vinod Kumar observed:
“Now the situation is that the original Award is not available before this Court. Though an arbitral Award is a chargeable instrument, as evident from Article 12 read with Article 15 to Schedule IA of The Indian Stamp (Delhi Amendment) Act 2001, the copy of the Award can neither be stamped nor can be impounded as per the Stamp Act, 1899. As already stated, unstamped Award would not be executable, therefore, the amount cannot be released to Decree Holder.”
The order, pronounced on October 1, 2026, dealt with two applications filed by British Marine in proceedings to enforce the award. SAIL had separately challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Pursuant to orders dated December 18, 2023 and February 27, 2024, SAIL deposited ₹230.33 crore, representing 50% of the decretal amount, with the registrar general of the high court. Three deposits were made on March 28, 2024, while another was made on March 28, 2025.
On November 11, 2024, the court allowed release of the deposited amount against a bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the registrar general. British Marine furnished an ICICI Bank guarantee for ₹17.09 crore, dated April 7, 2025. The corresponding amount was released on December 8, 2025.
The British Marine subsequently sought discharge of the guarantee and release of the remaining ₹213.24 crore.
SAIL's challenge under Section 34 was dismissed on October 13, 2025. Its Section 37 appeal was subsequently dismissed by a division bench of the high court on September 17, 2026.
SAIL's counsel acknowledged that a special leave petition had been filed before the Supreme Court but confirmed that there was no stay. The objection before the high court was that the award remained unstamped and therefore could not be executed.
The court considered URC Construction (P) Ltd v. Airports Authority of India, decided on September 1, 2026. It noted that the decision held that the requirements under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the Registration Act, 1908 and the court's procedural mandate had to be strictly followed.
The court then asked where the original award was. Both sides confirmed that it was lying in a sealed cover in the possession of the Supreme Court pursuant to its September 14, 2022 directions.
The court dismissed the British Marine's application for release of the balance amount. It gave the company liberty to bring the original award before it and complete the necessary stamp-duty formalities. The award could then be enforced, after which British Marine could file a fresh application for release of the remaining amount.
Separately, the court discharged the ₹17.09 crore bank guarantee, observing that retaining it served no purpose since the amount secured by it had already been released. It directed that the guarantee be released to British Marine and that the concerned bank be informed
For Petitioner (British Marine PLC): Senior Advocate Ramesh Singh; Advocates Sumit K. Batra, Anupam Dighe, Manish Khurana, Chandni, Priyanka Jindal, Ishaan Saini, Parth Sharma.
For Respondent (Steel Authority of India Ltd.): Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao; Advocates Ajay Sabharwal, Sidhartha Sharma, Priyanka Tibrewal, Rishav Dutt, Aman Kataruka, Anirudh Pandit.