Delhi High Court - Orders
Vedanta Limited vs Shenzhen Shandong Nuclear ... on 10 August, 2021
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~16
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 61/2020
VEDANTA LIMITED ..... Decree Holder
Through: Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Senior Advocate
with Ms. Ranjana Roy Gawai, Ms.
Vasudha Sen and Ms. Prachi
Golechha, Advocates.
versus
SHENZHEN SHANDONG NUCLEAR
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED
(SSNCCL) ..... Judgement Debtor
Through: Mr. Ranjit Prakash, Mr. Anshuman
Pande, Mr. Abhinav Raghuvanshi and
Ms. Vishalakshi Singh, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 10.08.2021 [VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
1. By referring to the Order dated 9th March, 2021, a preliminary objection has been raised by SSNCCL that since the issue involved in the present petition is pending consideration in Appeal1 filed by SSNCCL, hearing in the present petition be deferred. The said appeal impugns an Order2 of a coordinate bench of this court rejecting SSNCCL's argument that date of conversion of currency should be taken as date of payment.
2. The counsel have been heard extensively on this aspect. In the opinion of 1 EFA(OS)(COMM) 5/2020.
2Dated 06th January, 2020 in O.M.P. (ENF.) (COMM.) 225/2018 filed by SSNCCL as the decree-holder, seeking execution of Award dated 09th November, 2017.
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 61/2020 Page 1 of 3the court, the present execution need not await the decision of the appeal referred-above, for the following reasons:
2.1. The present execution petition is confined to the prayer for direction to SSNCCL to comply with the directions contained in para 133 of the Award to provide entire drawings and documents related and connected with the project. Para 133 reads as follows:
"133. However, the entire drawings and all other documents related and connected with the project which are in the custody of the claimant shall be handed over to the respondent within 90 days from the date of the Award."
2.2. Although the order impugned in the appeal also directs SSNCCL to handover the drawings in question, but the said directions have not been impugned in the appeal and are thus not the subject matter of the appeal.
2.3. The directions for return of the drawings and documents to Vedanta, as stated in para 133 of the Award, have to be examined independent of the directions for payment of money as awarded by the Arbitral Tribunal in para 134 of the Award, which reads as under:
"134. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid, the following amounts are awarded in favour of the Claimant and the Respondent is liable to pay the same to the Claimant within a period of 120 days from the date of this award:
I. Under the First Claim:
(a) Rs.46,71,41,942/- and Euro 23,717,437; and
(b) Rs.12,19,69,047/-.
II. Under the Second Claim:-
(a) Rs.25,47,325/-; and
(b) Rs.6,06,707/-.
(c) Rs. 1,31,10,990/- "
OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 61/2020 Page 2 of 3
2.4. SSNCCL has not challenged the Impugned Award. Therefore, the directions contained in para 133 have attained finality; and in the present petition, only that part of the Award is being executed.
2.5. Para 11 of the order dated 6th January, 2020, records the contention of SSNCCL that the amounts to be paid to Vedanta are not subject to return of drawings and other documents. Therefore, even as per SSNCCL, the prayer in the present petition is not inter-linked with the payment of money, as directed in para 134 of the Award.
3. In view of the above, the Court sees no reason not to proceed with the present execution petition.
4. At this stage, Mr. Ranjit Prakash, learned senior counsel for SSNCCL, states that he would like to address arguments on merits on some other day, and requests for an adjournment.
5. Re-notify on 10th September, 2021.
SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 10, 2021 v OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 61/2020 Page 3 of 3