Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Gmr Kamalanga Energy Ltd. vs Sepco Electric Power Construction ... on 15 May, 2023
Bench: S. Ravindra Bhat, Dipankar Datta
ITEM NO.44 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12194/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-06-2022
in ARBP (ICA) No. 1/2021 passed by the High Court Of Orissa At
Cuttack)
GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LTD. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SEPCO ELECTRIC POWER CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION Respondent(s)
IA No. 141239/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
IA No. 4225/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
IA No. 94699/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 15-05-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Sr. Adv.
Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Saket Sikri, Adv.
Ms. Aanchal Mullick, Adv.
Mr. Divyanshu Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Pakhiddey, Adv.
Mr. Manav Gill, Adv.
Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Samar Singh Kachwaha, Adv.
Ms. Garima Bajaj, AOR
Ms. Ankit Khushu, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Mohan, Adv.
Ms. Bhavana Chandak, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Ms. Aanya Saluja, Adv.
Digitally signed by
Harshita Uppal
Date: 2023.05.20
Ms. Soumya Singh Hooda, Adv.
12:34:43 IST
Reason: Mr. Raghav Bhatia, Adv.
1
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that it would be inappropriate to consider the merits of the present special leave petition. It is open to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the said Commercial Appellate Division Bench within four weeks from today.
The present special leave petition is disposed of in terms of the following directions.
1. The Chief Justice, Orissa High Court is requested to constitute a Commercial Appellate Division under Section 5 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to hear the appeal under Section 37 against the order dated 17.06.2022 passed by Ld. Single Judge.
2. The petitioner has undertaken to file a Section 37 Appeal, urging all contentions/grounds averred in the SLP, against the said order of the learned Single Judge within a period of 8 weeks (as prescribed in Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015) from the date of constitution of the Commercial Appellate Division.
3. It is open to the parties to urge all contention, including objections by the petitioner and all other contentions of the respondent, on all aspects.
It is argued on behalf of the respondent that the financial condition of the petitioner and its holding 2 company are precarious. A pointed reference was made to the auditor’s report of the petitioner as well as its holding company, which were brought on record.
Learned counsel also relied upon the general approach of this Court in regard to entertaining applications for interim stay or other interim relief, during the pendancy of objections under Section 34 or even appeal under Section 37 to interdict the operation of the award and oppose the request for continuation of the interim order. It is submitted that by rights, the petitioner is under a duty to deposit the entire awarded amount.
Having considered the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the interim order should enure and bind the parties till 30th June, 2023 to enable the Commercial Appellate Division to hear arguments on this aspect. Neither the interim order of this Court dated 25.07.2022 nor any contention urged on behalf of the parties for its continuation or vacation shall be considered conclusive and all rights and contentions, in this regard, are kept open.
The special leave petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
(HARSHITA UPPAL) (MATHEW ABRAHAM)
SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)
3