Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

Reliance Infrastructure wins arbitration dispute against State of Goa, High Court's verdict set aside

03 September 2024 10:17 AM

By: Admin


Reliance Infrastructure has emerged victorious in an arbitration dispute against the State of Goa over the delayed payment for the construction of a power plant. The Bombay High Court had reduced the interest rate awarded to Reliance by the arbitrator, but the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's verdict and restored the award in its entirety.

Reliance Infrastructure had constructed a 48 MW power plant for the State of Goa under a power purchase agreement (PPA). The project was commissioned in 2013, and Reliance sought arbitration in 2016 after the state failed to pay for the power generated by the plant. In 2018, the arbitrator awarded Reliance a sum of Rs. 292.22 crore along with an interest of 15% per annum from 1st August 2013 till the date of payment.

However, the State of Goa challenged the award in the Bombay High Court, which reduced the interest rate to 10% per annum. Reliance then filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the High Court's verdict.

A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar observed that the High Court had misdirected itself on the major issues concerning the merits of the award. The court noted that the arbitrator had acted within his jurisdiction in awarding the interest rate of 15% per annum, as prevailing interest rates at the time were in the range of 13% to 14% per annum.

The Supreme Court also held that the scope of "patent illegality" cannot be breached by mere use of different expressions which nevertheless refer only to "error" and not to "patent illegality". The court reprimanded the High Court for relying on the analysis of a learned Single Judge instead of examining the enunciations of the Supreme Court in earlier judgments.

The court set aside the High Court's verdict and restored the award in its entirety. The appeal filed by Reliance Infrastructure was allowed accordingly, and the appeal filed by the State of Goa was dismissed. The court ordered that no costs be awarded.

D.D-10.May.2023

RELIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.   vs STATE OF GOA 

Latest Legal News