Delhi HC to hear Reliance Infrastructure's execution petition on Monday

Top Stories

»	49% Indian startups now from tier 2, 3 cities: Jitendra Singh
»	'India ranks 3rd in global startup ecosystem & number of unicorns'
»	Tripura exported over 9K tonnes of pineapples in 2 years
»	CPI inflation eases to 6.71% in July, IIP falls to 12.3%
»	Rupee depreciates 12 paise to close at 79.64 against US dollar

SME Times News Bureau | 04 Dec, 2021
The Delhi High Court will hear the execution petition of Reliance Infrastructure's subsidiary Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt Ltd (DAMEPL) on Monday.

The execution petition was filed by the DAMEPL against Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC),
to get the Supreme Court order enforced, that had upheld the Rs 7,100 crore arbitration award in favour of the company.

Over three months have passed since the pronouncement of the order by SC in favour of DAMEPL, DMRC is yet to make the payment to the company. The Supreme Court has also dismissed the review petition of DMRC.

The DMRC has been utilizing the Project Assets constructed/installed by Reliance Infrastructure-subsidiary DAMEPL and the Project revenues ever since July 2013.

According to legal sources, each day of delay by DMRC, in satisfying the award, costs Rs 1.75 crore to the exchequer. Out of the money-decree of Rs 7,200 crore as on date, Rs 2,945 crore is the principal amount and the remaining Rs 4,255 crore is the pre-award and post-award interest.

DAMEPL had succeeded in the Supreme Court against DMRC, on the issue of termination of the Concession Agreement for the Airport Metro Express Line. The Termination Payment and other compensation, under the arbitral award amounting to Rs 7,100 crore were confirmed by the Supreme Court in its order on September 9, 2021.

When contacted, Reliance Infrastructure spokesperson declined to comment as the matter is sub judice.

The Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, Govt of India, has issued "General Instructions on Procurement and Project Management" on October 29, 2021 which emphasise that appeals are sometimes resorted to by officials to postpone the problem and defer personal accountability and that casual appealing in cases has resulted in payment of heavy damages/ compensation/ additional interest cost, thereby causing more harm to the exchequer.

The Instructions also state that officials responsible for not adhering to the Rule 227A of the GFRs would be held personally accountable for the additional interest arising, in the event of the final court order going against the entity.