Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mstc Ltd. Etc. Etc. vs Export Credit Guarantee Corp. Of India ... on 2 November, 2015
Bench: T.S. Thakur, V. Gopala Gowda
1
ITEM NO.27 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 7327-7362/2014
MSTC LTD. ETC. ETC. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE CORP.
OF INDIA LTD. ETC. ETC. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents)
Date : 02/11/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA
For Appellant(s)
Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, AG
Mr. V.Giri, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Niloy Pyne, Adv.
Mr. P.S.Sudheer, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Maheshwari, Adv.
Ms. Anne Mathew, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Jose, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Bharat Sangal,Adv.
Mr. Sachin Chandrana, Adv.
Ms. Vernika Tomar, Adv.
Ms. Srijana Lama, Adv.
Ms. Daggar Malhotra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
When the matter came up before us on 03.07.2015 we had granted time to Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior counsel for the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by respondent-Corporation to take instructions whether the respondent ASHOK RAJ SINGH Date: 2015.11.04 10:38:22 IST Reason: is willing to have the matter referred for adjudication to a sole Arbitrator to be nominated by this Court. That suggestion had been prompted primarily by the fact that the petitioner as well as 2 respondent both are government corporations and any dispute between the two should be resolved by amicable negotiations within the government and if no such resolution was possible at least by a reference of the disputes to an Arbitrator for adjudication. We are told by learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation that the matter was referred first to Ministry of Steel and Commerce and then to the Law Ministry for their opinion. Learned counsel further submits that he has received instructions to the effect that Ministry of Commerce does not approve of any reference to the Arbitrator.
Mr.V.Giri, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, however, submits that even the Attorney General of India had advised the Ministries and the Corporations concerned to resolve the matter amicably instead of fighting it out before the Court. He submits that just because an amicable settlement has not been possible is no reason why the respondent-Corporation should force the petitioner to resort to a civil suit which is a time consuming and expensive proposition. We are prima facie inclined to agree with Mr.Giri but before we pass any orders on the subject we would once again like to have the assistance of learned Attorney General in the matter who may if so advised take further instructions in the matter before making any statement on the subject.
List again on 24th November, 2015.
(ASHOK RAJ SINGH) (VEENA KHERA)
Court Master Court Master