Suspense Crime Sach Ka Dam
Anil Ambani, the chairman of Reliance Group, faced a significant legal setback as the Supreme Court overturned a three-year-old judgment on Wednesday. This article delves into the details of the case and the recent ruling by the apex court.
Background of the Case
The dispute between Anil Ambani’s company and the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) dates back several years. It revolves around a payment order of ₹8,000 crore imposed on Anil Ambani’s company relating to a controversy with the Delhi Metro.
The Previous Judgment
In 2021, the court had ordered Anil Ambani’s company to pay approximately ₹2,500 crore, considering the complexities and implications of the previous judgment. However, this decision was challenged by DMRC through a curative petition.
Delhi Metro Rail Corporation’s Petition
The Chief Justice of India led a special bench that permitted DMRC’s curative petition against the 2021 judgment of the Delhi High Court. The bench deemed the High Court’s order as a ‘considered decision,’ stating that the Supreme Court had no valid grounds for intervention.
Supreme Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court declared that the decisions of lower courts, which intervened with the High Court’s judgment, impeded justice.
Observations by the Court
The bench stated that the actions of the lower courts in nullifying the High Court’s decision were inappropriate and reinstated the invalidated order, which imposed excessive liability on a public entity.
Implications of the Decision
Following the Supreme Court’s directive, DMRC is obligated to reimburse Reliance Infrastructure, a subsidiary of Reliance Group, with the amount specified in the arbitration award.
Compliance with the Court’s Orders
As per the orders of the arbitration tribunal, DMRC is required to refund Reliance Infrastructure approximately ₹2,782.33 crore, along with accrued interest. This amount has surged to ₹8,009.38 crore by February 14, 2022.
The Supreme Court’s verdict underscores the significance of respecting judicial decisions and avoiding undue interference in legal proceedings. It emphasizes the need for fair and impartial adjudication to uphold the principles of justice.
