• Advertise
  • Membership
  • Sign inSUBSCRIBE
Legal Era
X
Sign in
  • Home
  • News
    +
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    +
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    +
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events
  • News
    • From the Courts
    • Policy & Law
    • Supreme Court (India)
    • High Court (India)
    • TAX Updates
    • MARKET WATCH
    • Deal Street
    • Global Insights
    • IBC Cases
    • Hires & Moves
    • IP News
    • Competition Verdict
    • Global Articles
    • Global Deals
  • Articles
    • ABOUT THE LAW
    • AWARDS & ACCOLADES
    • Aerospace
    • Agriculture
    • Alternate Dispute Resolution
    • Banking and Finance
    • Bankruptcy
    • Book Review
    • Bribery & Corruption
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Competition Law
    • Conference Reports
    • Consumer Products
    • Contract
    • Corporate Governance
    • Corporate Law
    • Covid-19
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Protection
    • Defence
    • Digital Economy
    • E-commerce
    • Employment Law
    • Energy and Natural Resources
    • Entertainment and Sports Law
    • Environmental Law
    • FDI
    • Food and Beverage
    • Health Care
    • IBC Diaries
    • Insurance Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Law
    • Labour Laws
    • Litigation
    • Litigation Funding
    • Manufacturing
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • NFTs
    • Privacy
    • Private Equity
    • Project Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Risk and Compliance
    • Technology Media and Telecom
    • Tributes
    • Zoom In
    • Take On Board
    • In Focus
    • Law & Policy and Regulation
    • IP & Tech Era
    • Viewpoint
    • Arbitration & Mediation
    • Tax
    • Student Corner
    • ESG
    • Gaming
    • Inclusion & Diversity
  • Law Firms
    • Global Law Firm
    • Asia Law Firm
    • India Law Firm
  • In-House
  • Rankings
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Events

Top Stories

  • Freshfields
    Finance partner Carol Van der Vorst
  • Time
    Time limit of 45 days under SARFAESI is
  • Justices-Uday-Umesh-Lalit-&-Aniruddha-Bose-&-Sudhanshu-Dhulia
    Supreme Court reserves judgement on
  • Justice-Yashwant-Varma
    Delhi High Court rules on not ousting
  • Deborah-Enix-Ross
    Deborah Enix-Ross sworn in as president
  • Dentons
    Dentons assists IMC Industrial Group in
  • Bombay-High-Court
    Bombay High Court rejects recovery
  • Pallavi-Bedi
    Erstwhile Partner at Luthra and Luthra -
  • WhatsApp
    NCLAT rules in favour of WhatsAPP, says
  • Jaewoo-Lee
    Jaewoo Lee appointed as the Managing
HomeNewsFrom the Courts
31 Jan 2022 6:30 AM GMT

Supreme Court annuls Delhi High Court's order

By: Nilima Pathak
Supreme Court annuls Delhi High Courts order

Supreme Court annuls Delhi High Court's order Prime Minister Narendra Modi had launched the Bullet Train Project in 2017 in partnership with Japan The Supreme Court has set aside a judgment of the Delhi High Court, which had directed the National High-Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) to consider the bid of infrastructure company Montecarlo Limited. It pertained to the...

ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to Legal Era

Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion

Subscribe Now
AlreadyaSubscriber?SigninNow
View Plans


Supreme Court annuls Delhi High Court's order

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had launched the Bullet Train Project in 2017 in partnership with Japan

The Supreme Court has set aside a judgment of the Delhi High Court, which had directed the National High-Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL) to consider the bid of infrastructure company Montecarlo Limited. It pertained to the construction and development of a depot for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad Bullet Train Project.

A bench of Justice MR Shah and Justice AS Bopanna said that the project was of 'national importance' and rejected the August 2021 verdict of the high court.

NHSRCL had rejected Montecarlo's bid and awarded the contract to SCC-VRS (JV). Subsequently, Montecarlo had approached the high court contending that no reasons were assigned to it while rejecting its bid.

The top court held that the high court ought to have appreciated that the project was a result of the long-drawn deliberations between the Government of India and the Government of Japan.

It further observed that Japan had agreed to fund a huge amount for the project.

"A huge amount is funded by the developed nation to implement the project meant for the development of the developing nation – the Republic of India. The contracts are entered into and the huge sum is funded on the basis of non-negotiated terms and conditions and therefore, the foreign developed nation, who has agreed to invest/fund such a huge amount is always justified in insisting on their own terms and conditions on which such a huge amount is funded," the apex court held.

Dismissing the plea, the Supreme Court said, "The scope of judicial review in such foreign-funded contracts/projects would be restricted and minimal. In such contracts, the only ground for judicial review ought to be on a limited aspect, i.e., the action of the executing authority does not suffer from favoritism or nepotism and based on the grounds which have been concealed from the foreign financing authority, if disclosed, would have persuaded the financing authority to cancel the contract."

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had launched the Bullet Train Project in 2017 in partnership with Japan. The project was to be completed by 2022 at an estimated cost of Rs.1.10 lakh crores. Around 1,400 hectares of land would be acquired in Gujarat and Maharashtra for the project for which about 6,000 landowners would be compensated.

In 2019, the Gujarat High Court had dismissed various petitions filed by the farmers and landowners challenging the land acquisition for the project.

Click to download here Full Judgment

Nilima Pathak

Nilima Pathak

TAGS:
  • Supreme Court 
  • Delhi High Court 
  • Justice MR Shah 
  • Justice AS Bopanna 
  • Gujarat High Court 
  • Government of India 
  • Narendra Modi 
  • Government of Japan 
Next Story
Similar Posts
See More
TAGS:
  • Supreme Court 
  • Delhi High Court 
  • Justice MR Shah 
  • Justice AS Bopanna 
  • Gujarat High Court 
  • Government of India 
  • Narendra Modi 
  • Government of Japan 
Trending Now
Can A Retailer Charge More Than MRP?

Can A Retailer Charge More Than MRP?

The Hierarchy of Indian Courts

The Hierarchy of Indian Courts

Freshfields

Finance partner Carol Van der Vorst joins Freshfields

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal Undertaking

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal

Recommended Articles
Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal Undertaking

Can an Arbitral Award Be Stayed Upon Surety and Personal

Stamping Out Illegal Streaming Technology – Recent Amendments to The Copyright Act

Stamping Out Illegal Streaming Technology – Recent

The Quincecare Duty of Care Story Continues

The Quincecare Duty of Care Story Continues

Recent Developments and Trends in Diversity & Inclusion in Japan

Recent Developments and Trends in Diversity & Inclusion in

  • News
  • From the Courts
  • Supreme Court (India)
  • High Court (India)
  • Global Insights
  • Deal Street
  • Hires & Moves
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Articles
  • Zoom In
  • Take On Board
  • In Focus
  • Law & Policy
  • IP & Tech Era
  • Viewpoint
  • Arbitration & Mediation
  • Tax
  • Student Corner
  • Interviews
  • Law Firms
  • E-Magazine
  • Legal Era TV
  • Membership
  • Reader's Feedback
  • Cartoons
  • Subscribe
Follow Us
Subscribe Newsletter
  • 2022© All rights reserved Legal Era Media Group
  • Who We Are
  • Careers
  • Advertise with Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
Powered by  Hocalwire
X
X