<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (1) TMI 2058 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459941</link>
    <description>Waiver by election was not established because the concessionaire&#039;s post-notice participation in rectification, CMRS application, and temporary operation was conducted without prejudice and did not amount to an unequivocal abandonment of termination rights. The arbitral findings on DMRC Event of Default and cure were set aside as perverse and irrational because they conflicted with the contractual framework, ignored the statutory effect of CMRS sanction and post-repair certification, and failed to account for safe operational continuity. The treatment of Rs. 611.95 crores as equity for adjusted equity and termination payment was also rejected as contrary to the contract and documentary record. The interest direction on termination payment could not survive once the underlying termination payment computation was disturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:47:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 2058 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459941</link>
      <description>Waiver by election was not established because the concessionaire&#039;s post-notice participation in rectification, CMRS application, and temporary operation was conducted without prejudice and did not amount to an unequivocal abandonment of termination rights. The arbitral findings on DMRC Event of Default and cure were set aside as perverse and irrational because they conflicted with the contractual framework, ignored the statutory effect of CMRS sanction and post-repair certification, and failed to account for safe operational continuity. The treatment of Rs. 611.95 crores as equity for adjusted equity and termination payment was also rejected as contrary to the contract and documentary record. The interest direction on termination payment could not survive once the underlying termination payment computation was disturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459941</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>