Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Avr Infra Private Limited vs Visakhapatnam Port Authority on 25 July, 2025
Author: B. Krishna Mohan
Bench: B Krishna Mohan
APHC010281132025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3527]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1334/2025
Between:
1. AVR INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, REGISTERED OFFICE AT
'NEELADRI', 3RD FLOOR, NO.9, CENOTAPH ROAD ALWARPET,
CHENNAI-600018, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED
SIGNATORY SRI. MANNI RAMALINGAM LAKSHMINARAYANAN,
...PETITIONER
AND
1. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, Visakhapatnam,
Visakhapatnam - 530 035 Represented by its Chairman and the
Members of the Board.
...RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the
circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be
pleased toPleased to allow the present civil revision petition and consequently
i. Direct the Respondent, its members, trustees, officers, employees agents
and workers be restrained by an order of injunction from in any manner
invoking and/or enchasing the Bank Guarantee being Bank Guarantee dated
July 12, 2024 issued at the behest of the Applicant by Union Bank of India in
favour of the Respondent and/or taking any coercive steps against the
Petitioner pending the arbitration proceedings. ii. Direct the Respondent, its
members, trustees, officers, employees workers and agents from in any
manner proceeding with and/or acting in furtherance of the Tender bearing
2
HBKM,J & HAHHS,J
C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025
no. 32/2025- 26/IM and EE/MOF/EQ10/O and M dated April 30, 2025 and/or
take any steps or actions which would have the effect of creating third party
rights and/or encumbrances over the Berth and from taking any coercive
steps against Petitioner/ AVR pending the arbitration proceedings. iii. Direct
the Respondent, its members, trustees, officers, employees. agents and
workers not to give effect to or taking any steps pursuant to the purported
termination of the Concession Agreement issued by letter dated September
5, 2024, or in furtherance of the subsequent communications dated
September 13, October, 10 and December 13, 2024 thereby direct the
Respondent to maintain status quo with respect to the rights and obligations
of the parties under the Concession Agreement dated 16.08.2010. Direct the
Respondent to maintain status quo in relation to allIV. securities, guarantees
including the Bank Guarantee being Bank Guarantee dated July 12, 2024
issued at the behest of the Applicant by Union Bank of India in favour of the
Respondent the ESCROW account, and all other actions undertaken or
submissions made pursuant to the Concession Agreement, until conclusion of
the arbitration proceedings. and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to dispense with filing of certified copy of the order dated 27.05.2025
passed in C.A.O.P. No.2 of 2025 by the Hon'ble Vacation Court
Judge/Hon'ble Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes,
Vishakhapatnam and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to direct the Respondent to maintain status quo with respect to the
rights and obligations of the parties under the Concession Agreement dated
16.08.201 Opending final disposal of this petition and pass
IA NO: 3 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to direct the Respondent, its members, trustees, officers, employees,
agents and workers be restrained by an order of injunction from in any
manner invoking and/or enchasing the Bank Guarantee being Bank
Guarantee dated July 12, 2024 issued at the behest of the Applicant by Union
3
HBKM,J & HAHHS,J
C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025
Bank of India in favour of the Respondent and/or taking any coercive steps
against the Petitioner pending final disposal of this petition and pas
IA NO: 4 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to direct the Respondent no.1, its members, trustees, officers,
employees, workers and agents from in any manner proceeding with and/or
acting in furtherance of the Tender bearing no. 32/2025-26/IM&EE/
MOF/EQ10/O&M dated April 30, 2025 and/or take any steps or actions which
would have the effect of creating third party rights and/or encumbrances over
the Berth and from taking any coercive steps against Petitioner/ AVRpending
final disposal of this petition and pass
IA NO: 5 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
pleased to direct theRespondent to maintain status quo in relation to all
securities, guarantees including the Bank Guarantee being Bank Guarantee
dated July 12, 2024 issued at the behest of the Applicant by Union Bank of
India in favour of the Respondent the ESCROW account, and all other
actions undertaken or submissions made pursuant to the Concession
Agreement pending final disposal of this petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. D S SIVADARSHAN
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. VIRUPAKSHA DATTATREYA GOUDA (SC FOR VISAKHAPATNAM
PORT AUTHORITY)
4
HBKM,J & HAHHS,J
C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025
The Court made the following:
ORDER:(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice B. Krishna Mohan) Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision is filed against the docket order in C.A.O.P.No.2 of 2025 on the file of Vacation Court IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam in the matter of the Special Judge for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Visakhapatnam, dated 27.05.2025 issuing an urgent notice to the respondent on payment of process through Court and RP and listing on 27.06.2025.
3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 before the said trial Court in C.A.O.P.No.2 of 2025, seeking an order of injunction and other reliefs against the respondent herein/respondent therein in which the trial Court granted the above said docket order dated 27.05.2025 which is assailed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. The main grievance of the petitioner according to the learned senior counsel is that the trial Court ought to have granted Ad-interim injunction against the respondent therein/respondent herein. Since it was not granted and as it is likely to cause an irreparable loss and hardship, this revision is filed.
5
HBKM,J & HAHHS,J C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025
5. Briefly referring to the facts of the case, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a concessional agreement dated 16.08.2010 between the petitioner and the respondent in which there was 30 years of lease granted with respect to the handling of cargo.
As per Article 2.2 of the said agreement dated 16.08.2010, the concession was granted for a period of 30 years commencing from the date of award of concession during which the concessionaire is authorized and obliged to implement the project and to provide project facilities and services in accordance with the provisions thereof.
As per Article 7.1(a)(xii), the concessionaire has to maintain minimum cargo.
As per the Appendix 14, the details of the minimum guaranteed cargo are as under:
Period * Minimum guaranteed cargo
1 to 3 years 25% of 1.85 M.T. 0.46 M.T.
4 to 5 years 40% of 1.85 M.T. 0.74 M.T.
Beyond 5 years 60% of 1.85 M.T. 1.11 M.T.
{
*The period is reckoned from the date of commercial operations. As per Article 15.1(vii), if the concessionaire fails to achieve the minimum guaranteed cargo for a consecutive period of three (3) years, it amounts to default of the concessionaire unless the non achievement of the same is due to a substantial change in economic policies including the policy 6 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025 regarding import/export of a particular commodity as a result of which the throughout could not be achieved.
6. It is the contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the concessionaire/petitioner herein could not achieve this minimum guaranteed cargo due to the reasons beyond its control and as per Article 15.1(vii), the petitioner cannot be blamed and penalized for the same. Without application of mind, the respondent herein issued a termination notice dated 05.09.2024 alleging default on the concessionaire/petitioner herein for not maintaining the minimum guaranteed cargo as alleged in the said notice. For which the petitioner gave detailed explanation and correspondence has been going on. Later, the termination notice was also extended upto January 2025. Since the respondent herein further proceeded with issuing of fresh tender notice dated 30.04.2025 covering with the works assigned under this concession agreement between the petitioner and the respondent dated 16.08.2025 along with the other works, the petitioner is aggrieved of the same as it has invested around 100 crores of rupees to build the berth by laying the same in size 120 meters for handling liquid cargo. Without exhausting the remedies under the above said agreement, the respondent hurriedly proceeded with the issuance of the above said tender notice dated 30.04.2025 causing frustration of the above said agreement entered into between the parties which is having otherwise enforceability for another period of 15 years. 7
HBKM,J & HAHHS,J C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025
7. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to approach the trial Court in the above said application but the trial Court failed to grant the ad-interim injunction.
8. On the other hand, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner ought not have come up with the revision since it was only a docket order that was passed by the trial Court dated 27.05.2025 wherein the rights of the parties are not yet determined. The respondent is ready with the counter and it will proceed before the said Court in which the application filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 is pending. Once that is decided, the petitioner will have a right of appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. It is too premature to come at this stage on passing of the docket order by the trial Court by way of revision before this Hon'ble High Court. The petitioner did not challenge the termination notice dated 05.09.2024. He further submits that the petitioner also participated in the conditional survey pursuant to the termination notice issued by the respondent dated 05.09.2024. In reply the learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that they have no objection to proceed with the Section 9 application before the trial Court if it is disposed of as expeditiously as possible.
9. In view of the above said facts and circumstances as the CRP was filed only against the docket order of the trial Court i.e., Vacation Court IV Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam in the matter of the Special Judge 8 HBKM,J & HAHHS,J C.R.P.No.1334 of 2025 for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Visakhapatnam, dated 27.05.2025 and the short date is given in the above said application by the trial Court and as both the counsels submitted that they are ready and willing to proceed with the above said application before the trial Court for early disposal, this Court directs the trial Court to dispose of the C.A.O.P.No.2 of 2025 as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. For early disposal of the same, both the parties shall cooperate. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits with respect to the application pending before the trial Court. However, any steps taken by the respondent pursuant to the tender notice dated 30.04.2025 specifically in respect of the works assigned under the above said concession agreement dated 16.08.2010 shall be subject to the outcome of Section 9 application pending before the Commercial Court.
10. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN __________________________________ JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA 25.07.2025 PND