[ad_1]
“Since the counsel for the petitioner (DAMEPL) submits a brief to the court and at the same time communicates with the enforcement debtor (DMRC) to resolve the dispute in a manner… In this way, the adjudicator does not come to the court with clean hands. , to inform again on March 29,” Justice Suresh Kumar Kait said.
“You (DAMEPL) are playing hide-and-seek with the court. Don’t waste any more time in court,” the judge observed, further noting that the company was not fair to the court despite ruling in its favour.
The court observed that pursuant to the order dated December 22, 2021, the DMRC had filed an affidavit in which it had submitted its bank account details along with the balance amount. Senior advocate Parag Tripathi, representing the DMRC, said it was ready to take over the liability of the Reliance Infrastructure subsidiary to the extent of the award money as it would be in a better position to negotiate with the lending banks. However, the offer was rejected by DAMEPL.
He informed the court about the letter dated December 30, 2021 written by DAMEPL to DMRC asking if it is ready to take over its debt due to DAMEPL and Reliance Infrastructure to its lenders.
DMRC responded to the letter saying that DAMEPL should first disclose the full amount of its liabilities, he stated.
To this, the judge said that DAMEPL had taken a different stand in court while writing letters to DMRC to settle the dispute.
“If you are settling the dispute out of court, why are you wasting the court’s time. Do not communicate with them when the matter is before the court. If you want, then withdraw the case. I will dismiss your case,” the judge said.
Advocate Pratik Seksaria, appearing for DAMEPL, said the company is exercising its legal right in the court to seek execution of the decree passed in its favor and argued that DMRC is not disclosing the entire issue.
“DMRC called and held meetings with my lenders about outstanding bank loans in my absence. You cannot meet my lenders behind my back. If you want to meet them, then take over all my duties and hold meetings with the lenders. If we reach a settlement, we will notify the court. I was against the move that they met my lenders without informing me, so I wrote a letter to DMRC,” he claimed.
He also said that the offer made by DMRC is not acceptable and DAMEPL does not want to settle the dispute in this way.
The court was hearing an application by a subsidiary of Reliance Infrastructure filed in the ongoing proceedings before the high court, alleging that DMRC was deliberately trying to delay the execution of an arbitration award of over Rs 4,600 crore against it, costing the taxpayer a daily interest of nearly Rs. 75 million dinars.
The application alleged that the DMRC was trying to defeat the process by only “restricting the disclosure of bank account details only in respect of Rs 1,642.69 crore” despite the order directing it to disclose all its bank account details and claimed that PSUs, in an affidavit filed in December 2021, he disclosed “total available funds” of Rs 5,800.93 crore.
However, the DMRC on Monday filed another affidavit in court disclosing details of all its bank accounts holding funds worth Rs 6,208 crore.
In its May 2017 award, the arbitral tribunal ruled in favor of DAMEPL, which had pulled out of running the Airport Express metro line due to safety concerns, and accepted its claim that running operations on the line was not sustainable due to structural defects in the viaduct through which would drive the train.
The high court had earlier observed that while attachment of DMRC’s assets was not allowed under Section 89 of the Metro Rail (Operation and Maintenance) Act, 2002, there was no such embargo on its bank accounts.
In December last year, DAMEPL’s lawyer told the court that according to the DMRC statement, it had over Rs 5,800 crore in its bank accounts as on December 17, 2021, with over Rs 1,642 crore in earnings and over Rs 2,400.70 crore and 1 Crore is its project allocation fund and deposit fund respectively.
The DMRC stated that since the corporation was facing a “financial crisis”, taking on the “sudden liability” would affect the public interest and the authorities were therefore working on a solution.
Earlier, the court was told that it will deposit Rs 1,000 crore in favor of DAMEPL in an escrow account.
The award was under a concession agreement between the two entities, which was signed on August 25, 2008. As per the agreement, DMRC was to carry out the civil works, excluding the depot, and the balance, including project system works, was to be carried out by DAMEPL, a joint venture -Infra and Spanish construction companies — Construcciones I Aukiliar De Ferrocarriles — with a share of 95 and five percent respectively.
The Airport Express line was commissioned on 23 February 2011, after an investment of over Rs 2,885 crore, financed by DAMEPL promoter fund, banks and financial institutions.
In November 2021, the Supreme Court dismissed DMRC’s plea seeking a review of its judgment upholding a 2017 arbitration award in favor of DAMEPL, enforceable against it.
[ad_2]
Source link
