Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Government Of India, Through Jt. ... vs Vedanta Limited on 17 November, 2025
1
ITEM NO.32 COURT NO.8 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No.59069/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-04-2024
in EA(OS) No. 635/2024, order dated 26-07-2024 in EA(OS)
No. 1105/2024 and order dated 09-05-2025 in EA(OS) No. 702/2025
passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi]
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, THROUGH JT. SECRETARY, MINISTRY Petitioner(s)
OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
VERSUS
VEDANTA LIMITED & ANR. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 268585/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLPs, IA
No. 268586/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 268588/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES & IA No. 268587/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE
LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)
WITH
Diary No. 59424/2025 (XIV)
IA No. 275676/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP, IA
No. 275678/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 275682/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES & IA No. 275680/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE
LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)
Date : 17-11-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G.
Mr. K. R. Sasiprabhu, AOR
Mr. Vishnu Sharma A S, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Bhardwaj, Adv.
Ms. Namrata Saraogi, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Singh, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Ms. Ritwik Sneha, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Date: 2025.11.19
18:39:04 IST
Reason: Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Anuradha Dutt, Adv.
Mr. Anish Kapur, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Sabharwal, Adv.
Ms. Suman Yadav, Adv.
2
Ms. Nikhita Suri, Adv.
Mr. Gurudas Khurana, Adv.
Ms. Surabhi Lal, Adv.
Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Exemption Applications are allowed.
3. The Union of India seeks to challenge three interim orders dated 24.04.2024, 26.07.2024 and 09.05.2025 respectively passed by the High Court of Delhi.
4. These orders arise from the proceedings filed under Sections 47 and 49 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 respectively for enforcement and execution of the Foreign Awards dated 12.10.2004 and 26-10-2016 respectively.
5. The order dated 24.04.2024 reads thus:-
“EX.APPL.(OS) 635/2024 (Application for early hearing)
1. The award holder has filed this application for the following reliefs:-
“a. Allow the present Application for early hearing of E.A.(OS) 82 OF 2023 in OMP (EFA) COMM. NO. 5 of 2017. Alternatively, Direct the Applicant to not renew the four Bank Guarantees amounting to Rs. 94,11,13,692 until the next date of hearing on 15 May 2024; and Direct ICICI Bank to not encash the four Bank Guarantees amounting to Rs. 94,11,13,692 as per Document D and not to remit the amount to this Hon’ble Court in terms of amended Bank Guarantees until the next date of hearing on 15 May 2024.
b. Pass such other or further order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
2. I have heard Mr. Tejas Karia, learned counsel for the award holder, and Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General for the judgment debtor.
3. EX.APPL.(OS) 82/2023 has already been heard in part and is next listed on 15.05.2024. Having regard to the board of the Court, it is not possible to advance the date of hearing.
4. The award holder’s alternate prayer is for a direction that the bank guarantees submitted by it, amounting to ₹94,11,13,692/-, be not invoked until the next date of hearing.
Mr. Karia submits that, although the bank guarantees are expiring on 12.05.2024, the claim period is for a period of one 3 year thereafter, until 12.05.2025, and no prejudice would be caused to the Union of India, if fresh bank guarantees are not directed to be submitted until disposal of the application for vacating the interim order.
He further submits that the award holder is incurring substantial charges in maintaining the bank guarantees.
5. As far as this aspect is concerned, Mr. Banerjee is requested to take instructions as to the validity of the claim period under the existing bank guarantees, and whether the security granted thereby is sufficient. Alternatively, it has been put to Mr. Banerjee that, if the award holder ultimately succeeds in the application for vacating the interim order, the Court would have to consider restitution of the bank guarantee charges.
6. List alongwith the enforcement proceedings and other pending applications on the date fixed i.e. 15.05.2024.
7. In the meanwhile, the bank guarantees will not be encashed, subject to an undertaking being filed by the award holder – company through an authorised representative, supported by a Board Resolution, to the effect that fresh bank guarantees for the requisite amount will be furnished, if so directed by the Court on 15.05.2024 or thereafter. The undertaking will also state that, in the event there is any impediment in furnishing of fresh bank guarantees or invocation of the present bank guarantees after 12.05.2024, the award holder will deposit the amounts secured by the bank guarantees into Court, in terms of any directions that the Court may pass. The undertaking be filed by 01.05.2024.”
6. The order dated 26.07.2024 reads thus:-
“1. This is an application seeking directions in favour of the petitioner No.1 to not to renew Bank Guarantees in terms of the order dated 29.10.2018.
2. Mr. Karia, learned counsel for the petitioner No.1 has drawn my attention to the order dated 24.04.2024, wherein the Coordinate Bench has observed as under:-
“4. The award holder’s alternate prayer is for a direction that the bank guarantees submitted by it, amounting to Rs. 94,11,13,692/-, be not invoked until the next date of hearing. Mr. Karia submits that, although the bank guarantees are expiring on 12.05.2024, the claim period is for a period of one year thereafter, until 12.05.2025, and no prejudice would be caused to the Union of India, if fresh bank guarantees are not directed to be submitted until disposal of the application for vacating the interim order. He further submits that the award holder is incurring substantial charges in maintaining the bank guarantees.
5. As far as this aspect is concerned, Mr. Banerjee is requested to take instructions as to the validity of the 4 claim period under the existing bank guarantees, and whether the security granted thereby is sufficient.
Alternatively, it has been put to Mr. Banerjee that, if the award holder ultimately succeeds in the application for vacating the interim order, the Court would have to consider restitution of the bank guarantee charges. .. . . . .
7. In the meanwhile, the bank guarantees will not be encashed, subject to an undertaking being filed by the award holder - company through an authorised representative, supported by a Board Resolution, to the effect that fresh bank guarantees for the requisite amount will be furnished, if so directed by the Court on 15.05.2024 or thereafter. The undertaking will also state that, in the event there is any impediment in furnishing of fresh bank guarantees or invocation of the present bank guarantees after 12.05.2024, the award holder will deposit the amounts secured by the bank guarantees into Court, in terms of any directions that the Court may pass. The undertaking be filed by 01.05.2024.”
3. Mr. Banerjee, learned ASG for the judgment debtor states that Bank Guarantees in question have a claim period of 1 year, i.e. upto 06.08.2025, and the application for modification is listed on 06.08.2024.
4. It is, therefore, directed that till the next date of hearing, the petitioner need not renew the 6 Bank Guarantees amounting to Rs. 134,77,25,758/- till 06.08.2024 subject to an undertaking being filed by the decree holder – company through an authorised representative, supported by a Board Resolution, to the effect that fresh bank guarantees for the requisite amount will be furnished, if so directed by the Court on 06.08.2024 or thereafter. The undertaking will also state that, in the event there is any impediment in furnishing of fresh bank guarantees or invocation of the present bank guarantees after 06.08.2024, the award holder will deposit the amounts secured by the bank guarantees into Court, in terms of any directions that the Court may pass. The undertaking be filed before 06.08.2024.
5. It will be the endeavour of the Court to hear the matter on 06.08.2024.
6. List on 06.08.2024, the date already fixed.
7. The last interim order 09.05.2025 reads thus:-
“1. This is a petition filed under Sections 47 and 49 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for enforcement and execution of the partial award dated 12.10.2004 and final award dated 26.10.2016.
2. For the reasons stated in the petition, issue notice.
3. Ms. Sabharwal, learned counsel for the decree holder, accepts notice, seeks and is granted 4 weeks to file a reply.5
EX.APPL.(OS) 702/2025
4. This is an application filed on behalf of the judgment debtor under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking direction to the decree holder to renew the 4 bank guarantees as mentioned in Para No. 1 of the application aggregating to Rs.94,11,13,692/-, wherein the period is said to expire on 12.05.2025 or furnish fresh bank guarantees of equivalent value.
5. Learned ASG submits that the same are necessary for protecting the interest of the judgment debtor.
6. For the reasons stated in the application, issue notice.
7. Ms. Sabharwal, learned counsel for the decree holder, accepts notice, seeks and is granted 4 weeks to file a reply.
8. Prima-facie, to my mind, the Orders dated 24.04.2024 and 26.07.2025 passed by this Court, adequately take care of the apprehensions of the judgment debtor.
9. Vide the Order dated 26.03.2025 passed by this Court, the Registry was directed to submit a report in terms of the Order dated 13.07.2023 passed by this Court.
10. The Registry is directed to share the said report with learned counsels for the parties.
11. List the petition as well as the applications for hearing on 20.08.2025.”
8. Heard Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union and Mr. Anish Kapoor, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-award holder.
9. The short point that falls for our consideration is whether we should direct the award holder to keep the bank guarantees alive or not. In the order dated 09.05.2025, the High Court has observed that the apprehension expressed by the judgment debtor i.e. the Union has been well taken care of by two earlier orders i.e. 24.04.2024 and 26.07.2024 respectively referred to above.
10. We are of the view that we should ask the award holder to file an undertaking before this Court through an authorized representative supported by a board resolution to the effect that if necessary, fresh bank guarantees for the requisite amount shall be furnished. The undertaking to be submitted shall also state that in the event there is any impediment in furnishing of the fresh bank guarantees, the award holder would deposit the amount secured 6 by the bank guarantees in terms of any directions that the High Court may pass.
11. We are of the view that the aforesaid arrangement should protect the interest of the Union.
12. It is high time that the High Court takes up OMP/EFA (Comm.) 05/2017 and connected matters for final disposal and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
13. Let these proceedings be concluded within a period of two months from today.
14. The disposal shall be reported to this Court.
15. The undertaking, as aforesaid, shall be filed within a period of two weeks from today.
16. One copy of the undertaking shall be furnished to Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, the learned ASG appearing for the Union of India.
17. With the aforesaid, the Special Leave Petitions stand disposed of.
18. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)