News

Delhi Metro should furnish bank details by Jan 11: RInfra arm plea to HC

15views


Reliance Infrastructure subsidiary, Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. (DAMEPL), has filed an application in the Delhi High Court seeking a direction against Delhi Metro Rail Corporation to make full disclosure of their all bank accounts and the funds lying in those accounts by January 11.

The Anil Ambani-backed company has alleged that Delhi Metro was delaying the process of execution of the ₹7,200-crore arbitration award in favour of DAMEPL.

The petition states that DMRC, in blatant disregard and contempt, has failed to comply with the last order of the court passed on December 22 that had directed DMRC to make full disclosure of their allbank accounts and the funds lying in those accounts.

“It is shocking that, despite the orders passed by this Court, the Judgment Debtor (DMRC) in blatant disregard and contempt of the order has neither filed such an affidavit within the time prescribed nor furnished the particulars as directed. The same leaves no doubt that the Judgment Debtor is wilfully and deliberately trying to defeat and delay the execution process,” the Reliance Infra subsidiary said in the petition.

Also read: Metros lead Covid spike, Centre cautious

The Supreme Court, on September 7, 2021, had upheld the arbitration award of ₹7,200 crore in favour of DAMEPL. DAMEPL then filed an execution petition in the Delhi HC on September 12, 2021, seeking court’s directions to DMRC for honouring the SC order and pay ₹7,200 crore to the company. DMRC has so far paid ₹ 1,000 crore.

In 2008, an agreement was entered into between DMRC and Reliance Infra’s special purpose entity DAMEPL for design, installation, commissioning, operation and maintenance of Airport Metro Express Line. In 2012, DAMEPL complained of faulty design and quality in the installation of viaduct bearings. A notice was issued by DAMEPL asking DMRC to cure the defects in DMRC’s works within 90 days from the date of the notice, failing which it shall be treated as a breach of the agreement.



Source link

Leave a Response