Delhi High Court · 2025-02-03
ISAR ENGINEERS PRIVATE LTD. vs NTPC-SAIL POWER COMPANY LTD.
- Citation / case number
- O.M.P. (COMM)-304/2018 2025:DHC:658
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- ISAR ENGINEERS PRIVATE LTD.
- Respondent
- NTPC-SAIL POWER COMPANY LTD.
Judgment text excerpt
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 12.09.2024 Judgment pronounced on: 03.02.2025 + O.M.P. (COMM) 304/2018 ISAR ENGINEERS PRIVATE LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Kiran Suri, Sr. Adv. with Mr Hitendra Nath Rath, Ms Vidushi Garg and Ms Laxmi, Advs. versus NTPC-SAIL POWER COMPANY LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr Sanjay Rawat, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH JUDGMENT : JASMEET SINGH, (J) 1. This is a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging the ex-parte Award passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator on 13.12.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Award‟) received by the petitioner on 15.12.2017. 2. By virtue of the impugned Award, the learned Sole Arbitrator was pleased to allow and award the counter-claims filed by the respondent. Facts 3. The brief facts encapsulating the present matter are that:- a. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 engaged in execution of works contract. The respondent is a Digitally Signed O.M.P. (COMM) 304/2018 Page 1 of 25 By:MAYANK Signing Date:03.02.2025 19:41:32 joint venture of National Thermal Power Corporation and Steel Authority of India Ltd. b. The petitioner was awarded the work of “Civil works for raising of Ash dyke (Lagoon-A from 231M to 235M for Rourkela CPP- II (2 X 60 MW)” by the Respondent vide Letter of Acceptance dated 06.12.2005. The duration for completion of the work was 12 months and the contract value was Rs. 2,59,43,975/-. c. The petitioner submits that there was delay attributable to the respondent since amongst others delays, the work site was not handed over in time, drawings were provided late and the rate of additional quantities of work were not finalized therefore the respondent granted ex