A domestic arbitral award is enforced like a civil court decree under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 once the challenge window closes, with no separate execution decree needed. A foreign award is enforced under Part II of the Act (implementing the New York Convention), and the award-holder can apply directly for enforcement in any Indian court where the award debtor's assets are located.
Enforcing a domestic award -- Section 36
Once the three-month (plus possible 30-day extension) window to file a Section 34 challenge has passed
without a challenge being filed, or a filed challenge has been dismissed, the award becomes enforceable
exactly as if it were a decree of a civil court. The award-holder applies to the relevant court for
execution; no separate suit to first convert the award into a decree is required, which is a deliberate
efficiency built into the 1996 Act.
Enforcing a foreign award -- the two-stage inquiry
For a foreign award, an Indian court first examines whether the award falls within the definition under
Section 44 (made in a New York Convention country notified by India) and whether any Section 48 ground to
refuse enforcement applies. If the court is satisfied the award is enforceable, it is then executed exactly
like a domestic decree -- there is no need for a separate suit on the award, which was a significant
improvement introduced by the modern Act over the older, more cumbersome regime.
Practical considerations for NRIs and cross-border award-holders
An award-holder should identify where the award debtor holds assets in India, since execution proceedings
are typically filed in the court within whose jurisdiction those assets are located. Common execution
remedies include attachment and sale of the debtor's property, garnishee proceedings against amounts owed to
the debtor by third parties, and, in appropriate cases, detention -- though courts apply the last option
cautiously and only after examining the debtor's conduct. An NRI award-holder should also budget for the
reality that execution can take considerably longer than the underlying arbitration itself, particularly
where the debtor actively resists by relocating assets, filing repeated procedural objections, or contesting
jurisdiction, so identifying and, where possible, securing assets early (including through interim measures
under Section 9 of the Act) can meaningfully improve recovery prospects.
