The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted a final one-week window for the settlement of a long-standing financial dispute involving the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), Reliance Infrastructureโs subsidiary Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL), and Axis Bank. The court warned that failure to resolve the issue within the stipulated time would lead to legal consequences.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh was informed by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Axis Bank, that discussions between the parties were ongoing. Singhvi also suggested that Attorney General R Venkataramani could mediate informally to expedite the settlement process.
The bench directed Venkataramani to prepare details of senior officials from DAMEPL and Axis Bank in case the court needed to intervene. โWe will wait for one week. If they settle the dispute, itโs fine. Otherwise, the law will take its own course,โ the bench said, listing the matter for further hearing on May 14.
The apex court has consistently emphasized the binding nature of its April 2024 judgment, which overturned its earlier rulings and required DAMEPL to refund approximately โน2,500 crore to DMRC from an escrow account operated by Axis Bank. The verdict came in response to a curative petition filed by DMRC, challenging the 2017 arbitral award and the Supreme Courtโs earlier endorsement of it in 2021.
The dispute stems from the termination of DAMEPLโs contract to operate the Airport Express Metro line in 2012 due to alleged structural defects. DAMEPL invoked an arbitration clause, which resulted in an award of โน2,782.33 crore plus interestโtotaling over โน8,000 crore by 2022.
Although the Supreme Court upheld this award in September and November 2021, it reversed course in April 2024, holding that its earlier decisions led to a โgrave miscarriage of justiceโ by burdening a public utility with an โexorbitant liability.โ The court restored a Delhi High Court decision that had originally set aside the award in DAMEPLโs favour.
In December 2024, the Supreme Court issued contempt notices to DAMEPLโs directors and Axis Bank officials for failing to comply with the refund order. Axis Bank has since contended that it merely operated the escrow account and was not party to the arbitration or subsequent proceedings for six years.
The court, however, maintained that Axis Bank had been subject to prior orders and could not now claim ignorance of the proceedings. It reiterated that it was not interested in the internal disagreements or defenses between the parties but only in compliance with its binding judgment.
As the court waits for a resolution, it has made it clear that any further delay will invite coercive action against the responsible parties.
