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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 47049

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Shail Jain, JJ
MOHD ELTAF VS. CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.
FAO(OS) (COMM) 90/2025 | CM APPL. 80434/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kartik Nayar, Divyansh Rai
For the Respondents: Aditya Verma, K Rigved Prasad, Parkhi Rai

A court may dispose of an appeal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if the parties enter into a lawful settlement agreement, binding them to the terms of said agreement.

Headnote:The appeal was filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging a judgment dated 5th May, 2025, which had set aside an arbitral award dated 14th January, 2020. The dispute originated from an operation and maintenance contract for a Single Point Mooring Terminal and associated facilities at Mundra Port. The court found that the parties had subsequently entered into a lawful settlement agreement dated 15th December, 2025, resolving all outstanding disputes. The primary issue was whether the court could record the settlement reached between the parties to dispose of the pending appeal. The court observed that since both parties had signed the settlement agreement and the terms were lawful, there was no impediment in recording the settlement and binding the parties to its terms. The present appeal is disposed of in terms of the settlement.

Table of Content
1. parties to an arbitration appeal may resolve their disputes through a private settlement agreement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. a settlement agreement is binding if it is signed by both parties and is lawful. (Para 5)
3. an appeal is disposed of when the court records a valid settlement between the parties. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)

$~40

O R D E R

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CM APPL. 80434/2025 in FAO(OS) (COMM)-90/2025

2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arising out of the impugned judgment dated 5th May, 2025 (hereinafter, ‘impugned judgment’) passed by theld.SingleJudgein O.M.P(Comm)538/2020 titled HPCL-MittalPipeline Limited.

3. Vide the impugned judgment, the award dated 14th January, 2020 was set aside. In the present appeal, on 19th May, 2025, after hearing ld. Sr. Counsels for the parties it was recorded that the amount had been deposited by the Respondent and is released in favour of the Appellant.

4. However,thepartieshavenowresolvedtheirdisputesandhaveentered into a settlement agreement dated 15th December, 2025. In terms of the said settlement, the following terms and conditions have been agreed upon:

“3) HMPL invited bids from interested parties for operation and maintenance (hereinafter referred to as the "O&M") of its Single Point Mooring (hereinafter referred to as the "SPM") Terminal and associated facilities at Mundra Port including verification checks during installation on the terms and conditions set out in detail in the bidding documents.

4) COMACOE submitted its bid dated 14.12.2011 and thereafter, HMPL issued Letter of Award (hereinafter referred to as the "LOA") bearing no. 7200001755 on 14.06.2012 in favour of COMACOE. In addition to the LOA, a detailed Letter of Acceptance (hereinafter referred to as the "DLOA") bearing no. 9820000128 dated 16.07.2012 was also issued to COMACOE. This arbitration clause equally applies to this Settlement Agreement. The Contract Agreement was executed on 17.07.2012 (hereinafter referred to as the "Contract") and the Contract Price was Rs. 21,88,20,000/- (Rupees Twenty one crores eighty eight lacs twenty thousand only). The effective date of the Contract was 14.06.2012 and the O&M Contract was issued for a period of two (2) years from the date of the LOA i.e. 14.06.2012. HMPL had paid an advance amount of Rs. 56,96,416/- to COMACOE.

5)CertaindisputesarosebetweenthePartiesinrelation to the performance of the said Contract. Thereafter, HMPL terminated the Contract with COMACOE vide its Notice of Termination dated 21. 11 .2012 and invoked bank guarantee of COMACOE for an amount of Rs. 1,09,41,000/-.

6) HMPL invoked arbitration on 10.10.2014 and arbitraltribunalcomprisingofHon'bleMr.JusticeG.P. Mathur (Retd.) (Presiding Arbitrator), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mukul Mudgal (Retd.) and Prof. Anthony W.J. Fernandez (hereinafter referred to as the "Arbitral Tribunal") was constituted. HMPL filed its claim of Rs. 19,40,43,582/- which was increased subsequently to Rs. 20,04,74,643/- i.e. by Rs. 64,31,061/-. COMACOE filed its Statement of Defence and Counter Claim of Rs. 22,09,75,584/- before the Ld. Arbitral Tribunal.

7) The Ld. Arbitral Tribunal passed a majority Arbitral Award dated 14.01.2020 read with the Order dated 08.08.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "Arbitral Award") in favour of HMPL allowing claims of Rs. 17,51,96,439/- and Counter claims of COMACOE towards BG amount of Rs. 1,09,41,000/- and Rs. 4,16,64,625/towards the 158 days for which COMACOE claimed that they had performed the Contract and that its bills remained un-paid. Thus, after deducting the aforesaid amounts, HMPL was awarded a net amount of Rs. 12,25,90,814/- along with costs of the arbitration of Rs.1,30,35,000/- (Rupees One crore thirty lacs thirty five thousand only) thereby totalling to Rs. 13,56,25,814/- (Rupees Thirteen crores fifty six lacs twenty five thousand eight hundred fourteen only) wit

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