2013 (6) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioner raised claims of different kinds. As many as three arbitrations ensued. The respective arbitrators awarded sums of Rs.1,55,49,724/-, 8,79,73,528/- and 32,31,897/-, with interest at the rate of 18% to 10% per annum. Proceedings were initiated before the respective Courts for enforcement of the awards or for setting aside the same, as the case may be. When the proceedings were pending before the Courts, the petitioner appears to have offered for a settlement. The offer was acted by the respondents. Ultimately, G.O.Ms.No.614, dated 25.05.2009, was issued by the 1st respondent, agreeing to pay a sum of Rs.13.25 crores in full and final settlement of the claims. The petitioner states that as against Rs.13.25 crores, the respondents paid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he petitioner has changed its position in several respects, on account of the offer or representation by the respondents, resulting in the issuance of G.O., and that the denial of payment of part of the amount is hit by the 'principle of estoppel'. He places reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. The Ulhasnagar Municipal Council1. He further submits that the deductions, which are proposed to be made, have already been dealt with in the course of arbitration and the respondents are not justified in not releasing the amount. Learned Additional Advocate General on the other hand submits that the G.O. has been implemented in its entirety and deduction of amounts covered by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. At that stage, the petitioner came forward for a settlement by offering to give up the part of interest. A favourable response has emerged from the respondents and ultimately, a G.O. was issued. The fairness on the part of the respondents is evident from the fact that amount more than Rs.11 crores were released in favour of the petitioner. The details of deductions are furnished both in the counter affidavit and the proceedings. They account for the advance income tax, VAT, education cess etc. The major component represents the deduction of excess amount paid towards the escalation of seigniorage fee and WCT. The agreement between the petitioner and the respondents provides for the revision of the bills or the amounts, in case there is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X