SC Fines Reliance ₹10 Lakh in Gas Suit
Apex court dismisses RIL's appeal in two-decade-old NTPC dispute, criticising the company's "unlimited power to litigate and obstruct"
Synopsis
The Supreme Court on August 14 rejected an appeal by Reliance Industries Limited and slapped ₹10 lakh costs on the company, holding it for over 20 years since it filed a commercial suit against NTPC in 2005 demanding natural gas supply which was still pending at the evidence stage.
AdvertisementA Two-Decade Standstill
In Reliance Industries Limited v. NTPC Limited, the Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe dismissed RIL's objection against the Bombay High Court order that parts of the evidence affidavit be redacted.
The disagreement stemmed from NTPC's invitation for tenders for the supply of natural gas to its power plants and RIL's financial offer, which was followed by a Letter of Intent issued by NTPC in June 2004.
AdvertisementAt a later date the parties disputed whether that Letter of Intent was binding as a contract for the supply of 132 trillion BTU of natural gas for 17 years, which led to the suit which has been litigated to date (and will likely be litigated again, as several trials have been cancelled as cases made their way up the court ladder).
The Bench was scathing in its criticism and noted that the petitioner's suit filed in 2005 was still at the evidence stage and that at every turn RIL had raised objections. The order said that the power of RIL to litigate and stall the proceeding appearing to be unlimited and the company did not appear to have any shortage of funds and was not under any compulsion to assist the court to manage its pending cases.
The Supreme Court has rejected a writ petition filed by Reliance Industries against the High Court order in the NTPC Gas Contract case that had put the company in a difficult position by denying it costs for its failure to file a response within 20 days of the High Court's order.
Shows consistency in procedural objections
For the life of the case, RIL had lodged a series of applications and appeals challenging procedural orders, including one seeking discovery of NTPC's internal records, which both the Single Judge and Division Bench had dismissed as a "late-fishing enquiry", and another to introduce NTPC's internal records, which was also rejected,
AdvertisementThe challenge of Supreme Court was later dropped. This is the same fate that awaited the present appeal, in which NTPC had sought redaction in an affidavit. Court Book
The Court ordered the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association to pay the sum of ₹10 lakh within five weeks. The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta represented NTPC, and in its defence, Bindu Saxena, Digvijay Dam, Aparajita Swarup and Shailendra Swarup were present.
