Professional Documents
Culture Documents
IN
REPORTABLE
JUDGMENT
L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.
Leave granted.
1996 Act’), the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was
LL 2021 SC 432
1 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
partnership.
LL 2021 SC 432
2 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
the AMEL. It was agreed between the parties that all civil
23.02.2011.
LL 2021 SC 432
3 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
08.07.2012.
LL 2021 SC 432
4 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
work.
LL 2021 SC 432
5 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
public sector.
LL 2021 SC 432
6 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
in the counter claim, on the ground that DMRC did not cure
29.5.2.
dated 08.10.2012: -
LL 2021 SC 432
7 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
8 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
on the Concessionaire.
regarding gaps between the shear key and the girder being
LL 2021 SC 432
9 | Page
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
concluded that the defects had not been cured within the
LL 2021 SC 432
10 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
11 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
had not been made out by DMRC. The learned Single Judge
were all within the realm of the Arbitral Tribunal and they
LL 2021 SC 432
12 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
that the Court cannot substitute its view when there are two
plausible one.
LL 2021 SC 432
13 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
the award
17. The Division Bench of the High Court held that the
AMEL and the fact that DMRC had successfully operated the
AMEL from 30.06.2013 till the date of the award without any
LL 2021 SC 432
14 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Delhi Metro Act’) and held that the cumulative effect of the
of the court’.
and the conclusion reached after doing so, was one which no
The High Court also found fault with the award which ignored
LL 2021 SC 432
15 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
1 (2015) 3 SCC 49
LL 2021 SC 432
16 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
awards
LL 2021 SC 432
17 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
18 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
which had the tendency to defeat the object of the 1996 Act.
LL 2021 SC 432
19 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
under: -
LL 2021 SC 432
20 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
21 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Rules, the legislative intent with which the 1996 Act is made,
LL 2021 SC 432
22 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Saran4).
LL 2021 SC 432
23 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
as under: -
LL 2021 SC 432
24 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
25 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
26 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
27 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
28 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
29 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
30 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
31 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
11.05.2017.
LL 2021 SC 432
32 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
to argue that the Arbitral Tribunal was clear in its mind that
LL 2021 SC 432
33 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Mr. Narasimha relied upon the Delhi Metro Act and the Rules
DMRC that the period for curing the defects did not lapse on
LL 2021 SC 432
34 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
and the AMEL has been in operation since then without any
even DAMEPL was aware that effective steps had been taken
LL 2021 SC 432
35 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
90 (ninety) days.”
LL 2021 SC 432
36 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
which it was held that the defects were not cured within the
held that the defects had to be cured within 90 days from the
LL 2021 SC 432
37 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
award has clearly held that DMRC failed to cure the defects
only after 90 days from the date of its issue, i.e., 08.10.2012,
LL 2021 SC 432
38 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
32. The High Court was of the view that the Tribunal
Section 7 of the said Act, has the duty to inspect the metro
LL 2021 SC 432
39 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
40 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
41 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
DMRC did not contend before the Tribunal that the CMRS
were not fully cured. The issue before the Tribunal was
in agreement with the High Court’s view that the issue of the
perversity.
LL 2021 SC 432
42 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
that the fact of the AMEL being operated without any adverse
event for a period of more than four years since the date of
the Tribunal does not fall upon the court in exercise of its
is held to be erroneous.
Adjusted Equity
8 State of Rajasthan v. Puri Construction Co. Ltd. and Another (1994) 6 SCC
485
LL 2021 SC 432
43 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
44 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
45 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
46 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
47 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Payment, which are (i) ‘Debt Due’, and (ii) 130 % of the
LL 2021 SC 432
48 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
LL 2021 SC 432
49 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
contended that the High Court aptly set aside the findings
‘Adjusted Equity’.
LL 2021 SC 432
50 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
that the Tribunal ought not to have treated the said amount
evidence on record.
42. Even assuming the view taken by the High Court is not
LL 2021 SC 432
51 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
29.5.2.
by DMRC
LL 2021 SC 432
52 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
the 1996 Act. In our view, the Division Bench of the High
LL 2021 SC 432
53 | P a g e
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
the High Court is set aside. The Appeal arising out of SLP(C)
.....................................J.
[ L. NAGESWARA RAO ]
.....................................J.
[ S. RAVINDRA BHAT ]
New Delhi,
September 09, 2021.
LL 2021 SC 432
54 | P a g e