MMTC LIMITED. vs ANGLO-AMERICAN METALLURGICAL PTY LIMITED AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:16.05.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 29.07.2025 + CS(COMM) 959/2024 & I.A. 43586/2024, I.A. 43587/2024, I.A.43588/2024, I.A. 43589/2024, I.A. 43590/2024 MMTC LIMITED ......Plaintiff Through: Mr. Harish Salve and Mr. Sanat Kumar, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Akhil Sachar, Ms. Sunanda Tulsyan, Advs. versus ANGLO-AMERICAN METALLURGICAL PTY LIMITED AND ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Jayant Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sumeet Kachwaha, Mr. Samar Kachwaha, Mr. Ankit Khushu, Ms. Akanksha Mohan, Mr. Pratyush Khanna, Advs. for D-1 Mr. Shyel Trehan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sumeet Kaul, Mr. Himanshu, Ms. Vidhi Jain, Advs. for D4-7 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:29.07.2025 CS (COMM) 959/2024 Page 1 of 39 13:43:59 JUDGMENT 1. Filing of the present suit by the plaintiff herein is a classic case of abuse of the process of law. Having exhausted all the remedies as available under the law, the present suit has been filed seeking to re- litigate the issues already adjudicated upon by the Arbitral Tribunal in the Arbitral Award which has been upheld by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, on a ground of fraud not upon the Court but by the officials of the plaintiff itself. The issue which is before me is: Can a “suit” be maintainable to declare an Arbitral Award a nullity. In my view, if this is allowed, then the very purpose and object of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“1996 Act”) will be rendered infructuous/otiose. 2. The present suit filed by the plaintiff has claimed the following reliefs:- “a) To pass a decree of declaration in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants to declare and hold that the Addendum No. 2 dated 20.11.2008 executed between the Plaintiff and the Defenda