Held: When issues were examined, the Court found that the same thing being raked up again and again only as an endeavour to not make payments, till in the Contempt proceedings they were compelled to make payment – The liberty granted by the order dated 09.03.2021 (Second Contempt petition) cannot be construed to seek refund of the amount paid under the orders passed by this Court from time to time – What was noticed was that some aspect was raised which was really in the nature of fresh dispute – The Court did not preclude the respondents from raising ‘all future disputes’ but that cannot be to unsettle the effect on the main judgment dated 05.10.2017 abundantly clarified from time to time – Finding themselves helpless in the face of the Second Contempt and with possibility of serious consequences, they sought to wriggle out of the consequences arisen by offering to make payment – The payments were made in terms of the imprimatur granted by this Court as to the quantum and, thus, what was sought to be done was to really reopen the same issue – The impugned order has simply maintained the petition and that would mean another round of litigation, and this is being continuing since the judgment in 2017 for the last six years – There is no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the impugned order, innocuous as it may seem, is not sustainable and this is yet another endeavour of the respondent to wriggle out of its obligation under the judgment dated 05.10.2017, repeatedly explained by various orders – In fact, the judgment dated 05.10.2017 itself dealt with the legal principles for interpretation of commercial contract exhaustively and those principles were then applied to the contract in question – The pricing of the coal was found to be the crux of the problem, which was adjudicated upon – It is this very issue which is sought to be raked up again – This Court considers to modulate and quantify the cost in favour of appellants-Nabha Power Limited and Talwandi Sabo Power Limited at Rs.40.00 lakhs and Rs.25.00 lakhs, respectively. [Paras 20, 21, 22, 23]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Nabha Power Limited (NPL) v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) and Anr. (2018) 11 SCC 508 : [2017] 14 SCR 301 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.