THE NAVI MUMBAI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER vs ANTONY WASTE HANDLING CELL PVT. LTD.

Judgment text excerpt

CARBP-6-2015=NMCD-2153-2018 -F.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION Digitally COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 6 OF 2015 signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH TALEKAR WITH KAMLESH TALEKAR Date: 2025.03.18 20:07:10 NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2153 OF 2018 +0530 IN COMM. ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 6 OF 2015 The Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner ...Petitioner Versus Antony Waste Handling Cell Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent Mr. Tejesh Dande a/w. Bharat Gadhavi and Vishal Navale, for Petitioner. Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms. Gulnar Mistry, Ms. Shrey Shah i/b Vidhii Partners, for Respondent. CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. Reserved on : March 4, 2025 Pronounced on: March 18, 2025 JUDGEMENT : Context and Factual Background: 1. This challenge to an arbitral award dated September 30, 2014 (“Impugned Award”) under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) relates to a dispute over collection and transportation of waste in Navi Mumbai by the Respondent, Antony Waste Handling Cell Private Limited (“Antony”) for the Petitioner, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (“NMMC”). Page 1 of 37 March 18, 2025 Shraddha CARBP-6-2015=NMCD-2153-2018 -F.doc 2. Pursuant to four near-identical tenders, NMMC and Antony were party to four agreements (essentially four work orders and the tender documents including Conditions of Contract) of a five-year term (collectively, the “Contract”) relating to specific segments of NMMC’s territory, for collection and transportation of residential garbage. The territories covered by the four agreements were: (i) Group I (Parimandal-I); (ii) Group II (Parimandal II); (iii) MIDC-I; and (iv) MIDC-II. This was for the period between August 8, 2007 a