further bits2 Nov 2018 14:53
Even if the principles of prima facie case,
balance of convenience and irreparable loss are
considered, the fact remains that the project
itself is of national importance wherein the
applicant has invested about Rs.480 crores and
the respondents have invested about Rs.313
crores and for a dispute of Rs.30 crores, such a
huge investment cannot be put to jeopardy. The
contract as well as the agreement provides for
independent covenant and the purpose of the
contract or agreement is not only drilling, but
also exploration, drilling and production. As
can be culled out prima facie from the record,
the some wells are already operative and under
such circumstances, if the participating
interest of the applicant is permitted to be
transferred or put to any hold for a disputed
amount of Rs.30 crores, not only that the whole
project would be jeopardised, but the investment
of the applicant to the tune of Rs.480 crores
would be in doldrums and the main aim and object
of the contract and agreement would be lost. At
Page 71 of 74
C/IAAP/130/2018 ORDER
this stage, even this Court is conscious of the
fact that this court has very limited
jurisdiction under section 9 of the Act, still
however, efforts were made by the Court that
there is some reconciliation between two
parties, however, as such attempts have failed,
arbitration is the only way in opinion of this
Court and till the same is decided, the
participating interest of the applicant should
be protected in some manner and the interest of
the respondent also should be taken care of as
the project is to run. It is also made clear
that this order would apply only to the existing
dispute by way of default notice and further
communication dated 29.07.2018 and no stay is
granted against the operation of any of the
covenants of the contract or the agreement and
therefore, even the windows provided in Order 39
of the Code of Civil Procedure are looked into
while deciding the application under section 9
of the Act, the equities between the parties are
to be balanced and in facts of this case, it
cannot be said that those three windows, i.e.,
prima facie case, balance of convenience and
irreparable loss does not exist in case of the
applicant, however, at the same time, interest
of respondents also needs to be protected.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
