Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

National Buildings Constructions ... vs The Director General (Map) on 5 February, 2020

Bench: N.V. Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna, Krishna Murari

     ITEM NO.101                               COURT NO.2                 SECTION XIV

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

              Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (C)            Nos.19641-19642/2017

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 15-12-2016
     in ARBP No. 96/2015 and order dated 20-02-2017 in RP No. 69/2017
     passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi)

     NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTIONS CORPORATIONS LTD                    Petitioner(s)

                                                     VERSUS

     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (MAP) & ANR.                                    Respondent(s)

     Date : 05-02-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI

     For Petitioner(s)
                                       Mr.   J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv.
                                       Mr.   Manoj Kumar Das, Adv.
                                       Mr.   Deepak Kumar, Adv.
                                       Ms.   Manisha Mehta, Adv.
                                       Mr.   R.L. Sinha, Adv.
                                       Mr.   Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR
     For Respondent(s)
                                       Ms.   V. Mohana, Sr. Adv.
                                       Mr.   S.K. Singhania, Adv.
                                       Ms.   Manjula Gupta, Adv.
                                       Mr.   Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.
                                       Mr.   Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR

                              UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                 O R D E R

Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the parties.

Identical issues as involved in the present petitions were decided by this court in M.A. Nos.2034-2037 of 2019 in Civil Appeal Nos. 6202-6205 of 2019, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited v. Canara Bank & Ors. now reported at (2019) 10 SCC 32. Para 7 of this Signature Not Verified decision reads thus:

Digitally signed by GEETA AHUJA Date: 2020.02.10 17:10:26 IST Reason:
“7. We have considered the submissions made by the parties. Though as a logical sequitur to the judgment dated 8-8-2019 [MTNL v. Canara Bank, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 995] , Canfina stands -2- impleaded in the pending arbitral proceedings which ought to be taken to the logical conclusion, in our view, an attempt must be made if the disputes between the two public sector enterprises could be settled through AMRCD. If any settlement is brought about through such an attempt, it will not only save public funds, but will ensure the true spirit of coordination amongst different public bodies. Guided purely by these considerations, we direct all the three parties i.e. MTNL, Canara Bank, and Canfina, to approach AMRCD for settlement of their disputes. If, however, the disputes are not settled by 15-1-2020 the disputes will then be resolved through the pending arbitration proceedings as directed vide the judgment and order dated 8-8- 2019.” Having considered the issue involved in the present matters, we are satisfied that the two contesting parties, namely, National Buildings Construction Corporation Limited and the Director General (MAP) under the Ministry of Defence, would be guided by the Administrative Mechanism for the Resolution of Central Public Sector Enterprise Dispute (AMRCD).

In view of the above, we dispose of the Special Leave Petitions in terms of the said judgment. It is only in the event of non-settlement that the matter would go to arbitration. We would also request AMRCD to examine the matter and pass appropriate order within 6 months from the date reference is made to them.

(VISHAL ANAND)                                               (RAJ RANI NEGI)
COURT MASTER (SH)                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR