M/S VOESTALPINE SCHIENEN GMBH vs DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR

Judgment text excerpt

$~187 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 16.01.2025 + W.P.(C) 5439/2016 & CM Appls.34145/2016 & 2263182016 M/S VOESTALPINE SCHIENEN GMBH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Ghose, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jeevan B. Panda, Mr. Satish Padhi, Mr. Rahul Kaushik and Mr. Rohan Mandal, Advs. versus DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD. & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Tarun Johri and Mr. Vishwajeet Tyagi, Advs. for DMRC. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The grievance of the Petitioner as articulated in the prayers to the present Petition is in relation to letters no. DMRC/20/III-088/2013 dated 22.04.2016 and DMRC/20/III-088/2013 dated 27.05.2016 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Communications”]. The import of these communications is that the Respondents had decided that all business dealings with the Petitioner shall be suspended for a period of 6 months from 22.04.2016. 2. This Court had stayed the Impugned Communications by its order dated 03.06.2016. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in terms of the Bidding Documents for supply of Rails [hereinafter referred to as Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5439/2016 Page 1 of 3 By:GEETA JOSHI Signing Date:25.01.2025 12:38:34 “Contract”] between the parties, more specifically Clause 3 of the Contract, prior to such a decision being taken for suspension of all business, the approval of Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) was required to be taken. He seeks to rely upon Clause 3.1 of the Contract in this regard. 4. In addition, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the communications of such a nature which suspends all business dealings of the Petitioner with Respondent No.1, were passed without giving th