Delhi High Court - Orders
Vedanta Limited & Anr vs Government Of India, Through Jt. ... on 4 May, 2020
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Ex.Appl.(OS)No.379/2020 in
+ O.M.P.(EFA) (COMM) No.5/2017
VEDANTA LIMITED & ANR. ....Petitioners
Through : Mr. Akhil Sibal, Senior Advocate with
Mr.Anirudh Das, Mr. Anirudh Lekhi,
Ms. Shriya Mishra and Mr.Arjun Pall,
Advocates.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, THROUGH JT. SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
.... Respondent
Through : Ms. Maninder Acharya, Additional
Solicitor General and Mr.Anurag
Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr.K.R.
Shashiprabhu, Mr. Tushar Bhardwaj
and Mr. Viplav Acharya, Advocates
along with Mr. Narendra Puranik,
DGH.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
ORDER
% 04.05.2020 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19] Ex.Appl.(OS)No.379/2020
1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the pleadings filed by both sides.
2. Even according to the Government of India, the principal amount in O.M.P.(EFA) (COMM) No. 5/2017 Page 1 of 4 issue in OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.15/2016 and OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.5/2017 is USD 144 million. This aspect of the matter is referred to in paragraph 21 of the reply filed by the Government of India which reads as under:
"21. In terms of this Hon'ble High Court order dated 29.10.2018, a principle amount of the USD 144 million was directed to secured through periodic deposits of the sale proceeds by the OMCs. A breakup of the said USD 144 million is provided below:
ONGC Carry Issue BDC OMP (EFA) (Comm) OMP (EFA) (Comm) No 5 of 2017 No 15 of 2016 Petitioner No. 1 64 29 Petitioner No. 2 35 16 Total 99 45 144"
3. Mr. Akhil Sibal, learned senior counsel, who appears on behalf of petitioner No. 1/Vedanta Limited says that the aforesaid table would show that insofar as the petitioner No. 1 is concerned, the total amount due in the aforementioned two proceedings is USD 93 million [USD 64 million + USD 29 million].
3.1 It is also Mr. Sibal's contention that dehors any other assertion that has been articulated on behalf of the petitioner No. 1 in the captioned application, the Government of India cannot seek security beyond USD 93 million.
4. I may only note that OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.15/2016 was disposed of vide judgment dated 19.02.2020. The Government of India's objections filed under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short "1996 Act") were dismissed.
5. However, while OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.15/2016 was pending O.M.P.(EFA) (COMM) No. 5/2017 Page 2 of 4 adjudication, an interim order dated 29.10.2018 had been passed. This order was common to OMP (EFA) (COMM) No. 5/2017 as well. The said petition is pending adjudication even now.
6. As would be evident, in view of the judgement dated 19.02.2020, passed in OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.15/2016, petitioner No. 1's claim to USD 29 million, presently, stands sustained.
6.1 Qua this aspect, Ms. Acharya, learned Additional Solicitor General says that the Government of India intends to file a Special Leave Petition (in short "SLP") against the judgment dated 19.02.2020, passed in OMP(EFA)(COMM) No.15/2016. It is stated by the learned Additional Solicitor General that on account of the lockdown due to the pandemic caused by Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the Government of India has not been able to approach the Supreme Court.
6.2 Ms. Acharya seeks three (3) weeks to have the SLP filed and listed for hearing.
7. On the other hand, Mr. Sibal emphasises the fact that even if this submission of Ms. Acharya is accepted, the security that the Government of India can seek cannot exceed USD 93 million which is the disputed amount in both the proceedings.
7.1 Prima facie, I find merit in this submission of Mr. Sibal.
8. However, given the fact that the Government of India seeks accommodation for filing the SLP, I am, at the moment,[having regard to the present situation obtaining in the city] inclined to stand over the matter by three (3) weeks.
8.1 In the meanwhile, the learned Additional Solicitor General will obtain instructions as to whether the Government of India is secured by way of cash O.M.P.(EFA) (COMM) No. 5/2017 Page 3 of 4 deposits and bank guarantees to the extent of USD 93 million. 8.2 I may also indicate that it has been Ms. Acharya's submission that the Government of India is also entitled to interest on USD 93 million and that an application in this behalf has been moved before the court. 8.3 On the other hand, Mr. Sibal says that petitioner No.1 has also moved an application for vacating the order dated 29.10.2018. 8.4 At the moment, I do not wish to make observations, one way or the other, qua the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
9. Furthermore, at request of learned counsel for the parties [which includes the learned Additional Solicitor General], the concerned four oil companies1 are directed, in the meanwhile, to deposit the amounts due with the Registry of this court.
10. Learned counsel are also agreed that in view of the lockdown, the aforementioned oil companies be permitted to deposit the sale proceeds with the Registry of this Court via wire transfer/Net Banking. 10.1 It is ordered accordingly.
11. The Registry will assist in having the money transmitted to its account via the means indicated above.
12. Accordingly, renotify the matter on 28.05.2020.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.
MAY04, 2020 Aj/k Click here to check corrigendum, if any 1 I. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited [CPCL] II. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited [MRPL] III. Gas Authority of India Limited [GAIL] IV. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited [BPCL] O.M.P.(EFA) (COMM) No. 5/2017 Page 4 of 4