Back
2014 Supreme(Del) 532
High Court of Delhi
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
M/s. Delhi-Gurgaon Super Connectivity Ltd & Others
Versus
National Highway Authority Of India & Others
O.M.P. No. 288 of 2013 & Ex. P. No. 88 of 2013
Decided On : 19-02-2014
For the Appearing parties:Akhil Sibal, Meghna Mishra, Premtosh Mishra, Jatin Mongia, Manmeet Kaur, R1, Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mukesh Kumar, Tavinder Sidhu, Meenakshi Sood, Tanu Priya Gupta, along with K. Venkatraman, R2, Pinaki Misra, Sr. Adv. with Arjun Pant, along with Sanjay Grewal, Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr .Adv. with Biji Rajesh, for SDMC. Manjit Singh, Addl. AG with Vikas Sharma, Nupur Chaudhary, Ajit Warrier, Aashish Gupta, Tarunima Vijra, along with Sanjay Grewal, Advocates.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the acceptance and influence of settlement agreements in resolving disputes and disposing of related petitions.
Headnote:
Arbitration - National Highways Authority of India - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Section 9) - 18th April, 2002 Concession Agreement, MoU dated 18th September, 2012, Bilateral Agreement dated 17th February, 2014 - The court discussed the settlement between the parties, the terms of the agreements, and the resolution of disputes in arbitration.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to restrain the respondents from acting upon a show-cause notice and terminating the Concession Agreement pending resolution of disputes in arbitration. The parties settled their disputes during the pendency of the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court accepted the settlement between the parties and disposed of the petition and execution petition in terms of the settlement agreements. The court also vacated the interim order and clarified that pending cases would be considered on their own merits.
Issues: The main issues involved the validity of the show-cause notice, termination of the Concession Agreement, and the settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the settlement agreements, including the Concession Agreement, MoU dated 18th September, 2012, and Bilateral Agreement dated 17th February, 2014, which led to the resolution of disputes in arbitration.
Final Decision: The court accepted the settlement, disposed of the petition and execution petition, vacated the interim order, and clarified the consideration of pending cases on their own merits.
Manmohan Singh, J.
1. OMP No.288/2013 has been filed by M/s Delhi-Gurgaon Super Connectivity Limited (DGSCL) against National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and IDFC Ltd. under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) seeking to restrain the respondents from acting upon the show-cause notice dated 8th March, 2013 and/or terminating the Concession Agreement pending resolution of disputes in arbitration.
2. When the said OMP was listed on 21st March, 2013 before Court, notice was issued to the respondents and the effect of the show-cause notice dated 8th March, 2013 was stayed till pronouncement of the final order in the matter. Replies to the main petition were filed on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2. The parties have also made various submissions in support of their contentions.
3. During the pendency of the abovementioned petition, the following applications were filed:-
(i) I.A. No.8248/2013, filed by South Delhi Municipal Corporation of Delhi (SDMC), under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for its impleadment as a party-respondent.
(ii) I.A. No.10709/2013, filed by State of Haryana, under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for its impleadment as one of the respondents.
(iii) I.A. No.10720/2013, filed by State of Haryana, under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC for disposal of the OMP.
(iv) I.A. No.13764/2013, filed by State of Haryana, under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC for disposal of the OMP.
(v) I.A. No.13765/2013, filed by State of Haryana, under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment in I.A. No.10709/2013.
4. The execution petition being Ex.P. No.88/2013 has been filed by five decree-holders, namely, IDFC Ltd., Bank of India, Punjab National Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur against DGSCL and NHAI, under Order XXI Rules 11 & 15 read with Section 151 CPC, seeking following reliefs:-
“a) Issue necessary orders appointing Decree Holder No.1 acting for the Decree Holders, itself or through a sub-agent as a receiver for the Project to operate, maintain, protect, preserve the Project assets and to carry such further duties as stipulated above, pending the appointment of a Selectee for the Project by the Decree Holders;
b) Issue necessary orders directing the provision of police and administrative assistance to Decree Holder No.1 acting for the Decree Holders, itself or through a sub-agent, to assist it in taking over, operating and running the Project and to carry any such further obligations as may be directed by this Hon’ble Court;
c) Issue necessary orders directed Judgment Debtor No.1 to handover the possession of the Project in the manner stipulated above.”
5. Along with the execution petition, an application being E.A.(OS) No.216/2013 was also filed by the decree-holders for directions and interim protection. Notice was issued to the judgment-debtors. Replies/objections under Section 47 CPC were filed on behalf of judgment-debtors No.1 & 2.
6. The above said execution petition was argued along with the OMP from time to time.
7. During the pendency of the matters, the three main parties, i.e. National Highways Authority of India, IDFC Ltd. and M/s Delhi-Gurgaon Super Connectivity Limited have settled their disputes. Before passing the final order, it is necessary that the details of the previous litigations provided by the parties are referred to, which are given as under:-
(i) The NHAI entered into a Concession Agreement dated 18th April, 2002 with Jaypee DSC Ventures Limited (now DGSCL). Later, NHAI issued a Preliminary Notice dated 7th December, 2011 for terminating the said Agreement, which was challenged in OMP No.945 of 2011 before this Court. The said notice was followed by Termination Notice dated 18th February, 2012. In the meanwhile Senior Lenders filed suit, being CS(OS) No.510/2012, relating to the said Agreement. The said OMP and the said suit were decreed by this Court on 18th September, 2012 in terms of
