Shenzhen Shandong Nuclear Power ... vs Vedanta Limited on 3 June, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Shenzhen Shandong Nuclear Power ... vs Vedanta Limited on 3 June, 2020

Bench: Rekha Palli

                                                   Via video conferencing

$~OS-2
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+   O.M.P. (ENF.) (COMM) 225/2018
    SHENZHEN SHANDONG NUCLEAR POWER CONSTRUCTION
    COMPANY LIMITED                           .....Decree Holder
                    Through:  Mr.    Gourab    Banerji,    Senior
                              Advocate, Mr. Ranjit Prakash, Mr.
                              Anshuman Pande, Mr. Mohit and Mr.
                              Abhinav Raghuvanshi, Advs.

                       Versus

    VEDANTA LIMITED                            ..... Judgment Debtor
                 Through:           Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Senior Advocate
                                    along with Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai,
                                    Ms. Vasudha Sen, Ms. Prachi
                                    Golechha and Ms. Ananya Chug,
                                    Advs.

    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

                       ORDER

% 03.06.2020 E.A. No.424/2020 (for exemption)

1. The judgment debtor/applicant shall file the affidavits and court fees within two weeks of the lockdown being lifted.

E.A. 423/2020

2. This is an application filed by the judgment debtor seeking exemption from renewing the bank guarantee No.0999813BG0000509 dated 14.08.2013 in favour of the decree holder.

3. Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the aforesaid bank guarantee furnished by the applicant is expiring on 13.08.2020 and in terms of the earlier orders passed by this Court as also the Bombay High Court, the applicant was required to renew the same at least 60 days prior to the expiry of the same i.e. by 14.06.2020. He submits that now that the matter regarding calculation of the amount payable under the award is at the final stages and there is every likelihood that the entire matter may be resolved before 13.08.2020, the applicant ought not to be compelled to renew the said bank guarantee at this stage i.e. 60 days prior to its expiry as earlier directed. After some arguments, he submits on instructions that in case the matter is not finally resolved before 13.08.2020, the applicant undertakes to get the aforesaid bank guarantee renewed at least one week prior to its expiry.

4. In view of this stand taken by learned senior counsel for the judgment debtor, learned senior counsel for the decree holder has no objection to the limited prayer sought by the judgment debtor.

5. Accordingly, the application is allowed to the extent that the judgment debtor is exempted from the requirement to get the bank guarantee extended before 14.06. 2020, but the same would be subject to the judgment debtor's undertaking as noted hereinabove that in case the matter is not resolved in the near future, the judgment debtor will ensure that bank guarantee is renewed at least one week before the date of its expiry, meaning thereby the bank guarantee will be kept alive during the pendency of the present execution petition.

6. The application is disposed of.

O.M.P. (ENF.) (COMM) 225/2018

7. List on the date already fixed.

REKHA PALLI, J JUNE 3, 2020 'sdp'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders