SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2468

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
The Governor of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary, Highways and Minor Ports Department, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
M/s. GMR Chennai Outer Ring Road Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
Original Petition Nos.124 & 285 of 2021
Decided on : 17-11-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :R. Shanmua Sundaram, Advocate General asst.by Edwin Prabakar, Government Counsel [CS].
For the Respondent:Ciccu Mukhopadhaya, R. Parthasarathy, Advocates.

Headnote:

Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 - Section 34 [2] [2-A] - Concession Agreement - Claim sum - Challenged - Claimant is a successful bidder for development of Chennai Outer Ring Road to a total length of 29.5 Kms and a Concession Agreement [Cases Referred :] was entered between parties for design, Build, Finance, Operate and transfer [DBFOT] basis and claimant was to be paid annuities half yearly post construction period - Appointed date for purpose of commencement of construction work under Concession Agreement - Construction period as per Concession Agreement is 913 days with planned completion period as per Engineering procurement and Construction [EPC] Agreement, Financing Agreements and Financial Model fixed at 24 months - Planned project completion date as per agreement and concession period is 20 months from appointed date - claimant also entered into an EPC Agreement with EPC Contractor in order to complete construction within 24 months so that it could earn bonus as per Concession Agreement – Held, Court is of view that instead of remitting matter to arbitral tribunal or setting aside a portion of award in respect of interest, Court awards pendentilite interest at rate of 9% from date of petition till date of award, thereafter at 18% as ordered by tribunal - Court is also aware of fact that this Court cannot modify award while exercising power under section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act - However, taking note of fact that parties have agreed to specific rate of interest in the contract including pendentilite interest, substituting same as per contract cannot be construed as modification - Accordingly, pendentilte interest alone is substituted and in respect of other aspects, the award is confirmed - Original Petition in O.P.No.124 of 2021 challenging entire award of tribunal is dismissed and Original Petition in O.P.No.285 of 2021 is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Petitions filed under section 34 [2] [2-A] of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,. 1996, O.P.No.123 of 2021 to set aside the impugned arbitral Award dated 30.01.2020 passed by the learned arbitrator and O.P.No.285 of 2021 has been filed to partially set aside the award dated 30.01.2020 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal in respect of the refusal to grant pre-reference and pendente lite interest in terms of the Concession Agreement dated 05.12.2009 and award the same in favour of the petitioner or alternatively remand it back to the arbitration with a direction to grant pre-reference and pendentilite interest at the contractual rate.)

1. As against the award of the three member arbitral tribunal allowing the claim for a sum of Rs.3,40,97,02,245/-, O.P.No.124 of 2021 has been filed challenging the unanimous award.

2. O.P.No.285 of 2021 has been filed by the claimant as against a portion of the award relating to the interest alone.

3. Since both the Original Petitions are arising out of the same award, this Court is inclined to dispose of both the original petitions by way of a common Order.

4. The parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the arbitral tribunal.

5. The claimant is a successful bidder for the development of Chennai Outer Ring Road to a total length of 29.5 Kms and a Concession Agreement [CA] was entered between the parties on 5.12.2009 for design, Build, Finance, Operate and transfer [DBFOT] basis and the claimant was to be paid annuities half yearly post the construction period. The appointed date for the purpose of commencement of construction work under the Concession Agreement is 03.06.2010. The construction period as per the Concession Agreement is 913 days with the planned completion period as per the Engineering procurement and Construction [EPC] Agreement, the Financing Agreements and the Financial Model fixed at 24 months. The planned project completion date was 02.06.2012 as per the agreement and the concession period is 20 months from the appointed date. The total project cost is INR 116.78,00,000/-. The investment of INR 1166.75 crores during construction [project cost] and about INR 425.89 crores estimated for doing O & M for the project [including taxes] apart from interest costs by the claimant was to be recovered through 35 regular annuity payments of INR 62,12,91.213 each in terms of Article 27 of the Concession Agreement apart from a promise of a Bonus payment equivalent to one annuity period as per Article 28 of the Concession Agreement. The claimant also entered into an EPC Agreement with the EPC Contractor in order to complete the construction within 24 months so that it could earn bonus as per the Concession Agreement. The claimant also mobilized requisite manpower and machinery for completing the project within 24 months. Besides submitted Master Construction schedule on 20.05.2015. Article 6 of the Concession Agreement set out the performance obligations of the claimant and reciprocal obligations by the respondent. However, the respondent has failed to cooperate with the claimant and failed to discharge their obligations. There was delays and breaches attributable to the respondent. Therefore, it has affected completion of the project within 24 months. The claimant has periodically submitted representations to the independent Engineer not only for extension of time but also for compensation. Hence, for various circumstances and delays attributable to the respondents, the claimant has made the following claim:

Claim No.

Nature of claim

Amount upto claim statement in Rs.

Additional Claim

1.

Financial Impact due to change in ground condition

144,03,21,479/-

--

2.

Financial Impact due to delay/non issuance of permits for borrow earth areas

92,93,61,985/-

--

3.

Financial Impact due to escalation in costs due to prolonged c



















                            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                            1
                            2
                            3
                            4
                            5
                            6
                            7
                            8
                            9
                            10
                            11
                            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                            supreme today icon
                            logo-black

                            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                            Please visit our Training & Support
                            Center or Contact Us for assistance

                            qr

                            Scan Me!

                            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                            whatsapp-icon Back to top