IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited - Appellant
Versus
Symphony Vyapar Private Limited & Anr. - Respondents
O.M.P. (Comm) No. 164 of 2021; I.A. No. 5828 of 2021
Decided On : 09-08-2021
Arbitration - Power Purchase Agreement - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - [NVVNL] - Dispute centered around whether NVVNL is entitled to recover liquidated damages from Symphony in terms of clause 4.6 of the PPA - Arbitral Tribunal held in favour of Symphony, directing release of the Performance Bank Guarantee furnished by Symphony and awarded costs in favour of Symphony - The court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal's decision, finding that Symphony had completed the solar power project before the Scheduled Commissioning Date and NVVNL had not suffered any loss, therefore not entitled to recover any damages.
Fact of the Case:
NVVNL filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, impugning an arbitral award rendered in the context of disputes that had arisen between NVVNL and Symphony in connection with a Power Purchase Agreement. The dispute centered around whether NVVNL is entitled to recover liquidated damages from Symphony in terms of clause 4.6 of the PPA. NVVNL claimed that Symphony had failed to commission the solar power plant for generating 10 MW capacity on or before the Scheduled Commissioning Date. Symphony disputed the claim, asserting that it had completed and installed the solar power plant with 10 MW capacity on or before the Scheduled Commissioning Date.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal's decision, finding that Symphony had completed the solar power project before the Scheduled Commissioning Date and NVVNL had not suffered any loss, therefore not entitled to recover any damages.
Issues: The issues for consideration included whether Symphony had completed the solar power project before the Scheduled Commissioning Date, whether NVVNL was entitled to recover damages, and whether either party was entitled to costs of the arbitration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the scope of challenge under Section 34 of the A&C Act is narrow and unless the arbitral award is 'vitiated by patent illegality appearing on the face of award' or in 'conflict with the public policy of India', it cannot be interfered with. The court also found that NVVNL had not suffered any loss and therefore, was not entitled to recover any damages. The court further concluded that the award of cost in favour of Symphony was reasonable and upheld the same.
Final Decision: The court dismissed NVVNL's petition and disposed of the pending application, upholding the Arbitral Tribunal's decision in favour of Symphony.
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. - Ntpc Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Limited (hereinafter "NVVNL") has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the "A&C Act") impugning an arbitral award dated 20.11.2020 (hereinafter "the impugned award") rendered by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of Justice (Retired) V.N. Khare, former Chief Justice of India, Mr Ambarish Dave and Justice (Retired) D.P. Wadhwa, former Judge of the Supreme Court of India as the Presiding Arbitrator.
2. The impugned award was rendered in the context of disputes that had arisen between NVVNL and respondent no.1 (hereinafter "Symphony") in connection with a Power Purchase Agreement (hereinafter the "PPA") entered into between NVVNL and Symphony.
3. Essentially, the dispute between NVVNL and Symphony are centered around the question whether NVVNL is entitled to recover liquidated damages from Symphony in terms of clause 4.6 of the PPA. NVVNL claims that it is entitled to recover Rs.2,87,77,000/- (Rupees Two Crores, Eighty-Seven Lakhs, Seventy-Seven Thousand only) as liquidated damages being 10% of the Performance Bank Guarantee furnished by Symphony, as according to NVVNL, Symphony had failed to commission the solar power plant for generating 10 MW capacity on or before the Scheduled Commissioning Date.
4. According to NVVNL, Symphony had commissioned 5 MW capacity on or before 26.02.2013 (the Scheduled Commissioning Date) and commissioned the balance 5 MW on 27.02.2013. NVVNL claimed that it was thus, entitled to recover half of 20% of the Performance Bank Guarantee in terms of Clause 4.6 of the PPA. Symphony disputed the aforesaid claim as according to Symphony, it had commissioned the Solar Power Generating project before the Scheduled Commissioning Date. It claimed that it had completed and installed 10 MW of solar power generating capacity on 21.02.2013.
5. The Arbitral Tribunal held in favour of Symphony and accepted its contention that it had completed and installed the solar power plant with 10 MW capacity on or before the Scheduled Commissioning Date of 26.02.2013. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that NVVNL was not entitled to recover any liquidated damages. The Arbitral Tribunal further held, in any event, NVVNL could not recover damages under clause 4.6 of the PPA without establishing that it had suffered any loss.
6. Accordingly, the Arbitral Tribunal directed that the Performance Bank Guarantee furnished by Symphony be discharged. It also awarded costs of Rs.1,08,66,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eight Lacs and Sixty-Six Thousand only) in favour of Symphony.
7. It is contended on behalf of NVVNL that the impugned award is patently erroneous as it is contrary to the terms of the PPA. It is contended on behalf of NVVNL that the impugned award disregards the Minutes of the Meeting of Commissioning Committee of 25.02.2013/26.02.2013 which recorded that Symphony had electrically connected only 7.04 MW capacity as on 25.02.2013 and therefore, the impugned award is patently illegal and is liable to be set aside.
Factual Background
8. The Government of India launched the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (hereinafter "JNNSM") with the objective to establish India as a global leader in solar energy. The Government of India through the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (hereinafter "MNRE") designated NVVNL as a Nodal Agency for Phase-I of JNNSM.
9. Nvvnl was required to purchase solar power from Solar Power Developers (SPDs); bundle it with the power available from coal based plants of NTPC Ltd; and sell the bundled power to various Distribution Utilities.
10. On 24.08.2011, NVVNL invited proposals for setting up of Grid Connected Solar PV Project under Phase-I Batch-II of JNNSM and supply of power. NVVNL issued a Request for Selection (RfS) inviting bids for setting up capacity of 350 MW of solar power. The bidders were to be selected in decreasing order of the discount offered by them over the tariff approved by the Centra
Associate Builders vs. Delhi Development Authority
Design Services vs. Delhi Development Authority
Dyna Technologies Private Limited vs. Crompton Greaves Limited
Point of Law : Arbitration - Application for setting aside of Arbitral Award - Courts would not interfere “unless Court comes to a conclusion that perversity of award goes to root of matter without t....
Commissioning of a power project occurs when power is first injected into the grid, influencing liquidated damages as stipulated under the agreement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the date of commissioning of the Power Project and the liability for liquidated damages. The court interpreted the relevant pr....
The interpretation of commissioning under a Power Purchase Agreement must adhere strictly to the contractual definitions and contexts, impacting liability for liquidated damages.
Arbitral tribunals have discretion over fact-finding, and courts should not re-evaluate evidence unless decisions violate public policy or involve patent illegality.
The court affirmed that deductions for non-performance are valid when based on contract conditions and substantiated by timely verification reports, emphasizing the importance of evidentiary reasonin....
The court clarified that in public utility projects, liquidated damages may be claimed without proof of actual loss, reinforcing the importance of agreed contractual terms.
The court upheld the arbitral tribunal's decision that the contract mandated construction power be supplied at 400/440 V, recognizing the claimant's entitlement to additional expenses due to unmet co....
The court confirmed that arbitration awards can only be set aside under limited grounds, primarily concerning public policy violations or patent illegality, reaffirming the binding nature of clear co....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.