Decree holders can choose the execution path of an arbitration award they have won, the Punjab and Haryana High Court says in an appeal ruling in July 2026.
The high court judgment said that execution proceedings could be filed before a civil court under the (MSME Act), or a state notification could grant execution powers to a district collector.
The court dismissed the appeal filed in and upheld the January 2026 order of additional civil judge (ACJ), Sohna, in Haryana.In the appeal case, the appellant Jain rejected the ACJ order. Under rule 10 of the (Haryana MSME rules), the civil court did not have the power to entertain or adjudicate execution proceedings in MSME matters and only the district collector had the power to execute the award, Jain said.
In the arbitration proceedings, the award was finalised on 3 April 2024, with appellant Jain the unsuccessful party.
Appeal respondent Shree Shyam, , the successful party in the arbitration proceedings, had filed for execution of the award before the ACJ as provided under the MSME Act.
In those proceedings, Jain who opposed the ACJ’s jurisdiction under the Haryana MSME rules, said the district collector was the only authority that could execute arbitration awards in the state under the Haryana MSME rules.
This contention was rejected by the ACJ who said the rules could not override or be inconsistent with the MSME Act. The MSME Act makes the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applicable to awards. Accordingly, an arbitral award can be enforced under provisions in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
Jain then filed an appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court against this ACJ order.
In the high court proceedings, Jain reiterated the contentions made before the ACJ. Shree Shyam argued that an additional mode of recovery under the Haryana MSME rules, did not remove the remedy available through the Civil Procedure Code’s provisions.
Shree Shyam relied on to further its arguments.
It argued that as the decree holder, it was free to decide which remedy it wanted to use. Hence, no applicable laws or regulations were violated with the ACJ entertaining the execution application filed by Shree Shyam. The court in its deliberations accepted these arguments.
The court also said that by providing an additional/alternate method of recovery under the Haryana MSME rules did not deprive the decree from pursuing the remedy provided under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Civil Procedure Code to execute the arbitral award.
