Jharkhand High Court
Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Limited ... vs Positron Energy Private Limited ... on 13 June, 2016
Author: D.N. Patel
Bench: D.N. Patel, Ratnaker Bhengra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No. 461 of 2015
With
I.A. No.5610 of 2015
1. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, having its registered
office at Jeevan Bharti, TowerII, 124Indira Chowk, Connaught
Place, PO Pratap Market, PS Sansad Marg, New Delhi110001
and having on of its offices at CBM Development Projet, 1st
Floor, HSCL Building, Bokaro Steel City, PO Bokaro Steel City,
PS Chandrapura, DistrictBokaro, through its duly authorized
representativeSri Pradip Kumar Basu, son of Late Niranjan
Basu, Deputy General Manager (Production), CBM, Oil and
Natural Gas Corporation Limited, CBM Development Project, 1st
Floor, HSCL Building, Bokaro Steel City, PO Bokaro Steel City,
PS Chandrapura, District Bokaro;
2. DGM (P)I/c, Marketing, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
Limited, CBM Development Project, 1st Floor, HSCL Buildjg,
Bokaro Steel City, PO Bokaro Steel City, PSChandrapura,
DistrictBokaro. ...Appellants
Versus
1. Positron Energy Private Limtied, through its Constituted
AttorneySri Sanjay Sharma, son of Late Surendra Prasad
Sharma, having its registered office at 411, Sukan Mall, Visat,
Gandhinagar Highway, Sabarmati, POChandkheda, PS
Sabarmati, DistrictAhmadabad 380005;
2. Everest Kanto Cylinder Limited, through its constituted
attorneySri Sanjay Sharma, son of Late Surendra Prasad
Sharma, having its registered office at 204, Raheja Centre, Free
Press Journal Marg, 214, Nariman Point, POKalbadevi, PS
Marine Deive, DistrictMumbai400021.
3. State Bank of Hyderabad, through Manager, Corporate
Finance Branch, 11C, Mittal Tower, 210, Nariman Point, PO
Kalbadevi, PS Marine Deive, DistrictMumbai400021,
Maharashtra. ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
For the Appellants: Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Indrajit Sinha &
Mr. V.A. Sahay, Advocates
14/Dated 13.06.2016:
Oral Order:
Per D.N. Patel, J.:
1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the
order passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A. No. 2759 of 2015
dated 02.07.2015 as well as against the order passed by the learned
Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 1449 of 2015 dated 17.04.2015.
2. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the
facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that contract was given
-2-
to respondent Nos. 1 & 2 for Coal Bed Methane Gas. The notification of
the award of the contract is dated 03.01.2015 and acceptance by the
respondent is dated 05.01.2015 and just within three months it
appears that dispute has arisen. It is the claim of the ONGC- appellant
that the respondents have not fulfilled certain conditions of notification
of the award of the contract and hence, a letter was written on
02.04.2015giving warning to the respondents that certain conditions of notification of the award has been violated by the respondents and hence this appellant may deduct amount of Liquidated Damages in the event of any delay in the commencement of gas off-take beyond 03.04.2015. Nowhere in this letter the liquidated damage has been calculated nor even subsequently liquidated damages has been calculated, nor in this letter desire has been shown by ONGC to encash the bank guarantee as the letter challenged by the respondent in W.P. (C) No. 1449 of 2015 and this writ petition is pending before the learned Single Judge. Interim stay has been granted against the encashment of the bank guarantee.
3. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that in the letter dated 02.04.2015, nowhere it has been mentioned by this appellant to encash the bank guarantee nor any liquidated damages has been calculatedcalculated till today. Hence, we see no any reason to modify the order passed by the learned Single Judge, which is an interim order, passed during the pendency of WP(C) No. 1449 of 2015.
4. In view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Atul Ltd. Vs. D.L.F. Industries Ltd. and others reported in (2001) 10 SCC 35 in paragraph no. 18 whereof direction has been given by Hon'ble the Supreme Court for disposal of the matters by the concerned High Court, we also request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the writ application bearing WP(C) No. 1449 of 2015 as early as possible and practicable, preferably within a period of six months from today.
5. In view of the aforesaid observations, this Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of.
6. I.A. No. 5610 of 2015 also disposed of in view of the final order passed in the L.P.A. ( D.N. Patel,J.) ( Ratnaker Bhengra,J.) Sharda/S.B.