- Home
- News
- Articles+
- 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
- Know the 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
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- 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
- Know the 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
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Vizag gas leak: SC puts Rs 50 cr compensation by LG Polymers on hold
On June 15, the Supreme Court put on hold, for 10 days, the disbursal of Rs. 50 crore compensation by LG Polymers for the Vizag gas leak incident, as directed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT).A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit, M.M. Shantanagoudar and Vineet Saran noted that the Andhra Pradesh High Court expeditiously disposed of the pending application in connection with the incident....
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
On June 15, the Supreme Court put on hold, for 10 days, the disbursal of Rs. 50 crore compensation by LG Polymers for the Vizag gas leak incident, as directed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit, M.M. Shantanagoudar and Vineet Saran noted that the Andhra Pradesh High Court expeditiously disposed of the pending application in connection with the incident. On June 1, the NGT had ordered the South Korean company to deposit Rs. 50 crore.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for LG Polymers, contended before the bench that the Andhra Pradesh High Court had directed the directors of the company to deposit their passports in the court, and this order is without jurisdiction. The LG Polymers moved the Supreme Court challenging the NGT and the High Court orders. On the last hearing, the Supreme Court had allowed 30 company personnel to access the plant for maintenance and other purposes.
Rohatgi argued that despite this order, the District Magistrate did not allow the company personnel to go inside. As the bench asked if a nod from the authorities was sought for the removal of the hazardous gas from the plant, Rohatgi replied the plant has been sealed, and this order was passed without expert opinion. He also pointed out that the High Court is yet to take up the matter despite a large number of committees having been formed to watch over the case. He argued that the Districy Magistrate’s order preventing two lawyers getting entry inside the plant was not proper.
Rohatgi clarified that his client has moved the Supreme Court to challenge the order in connection with deposit of the passports in the court, and also the order issued to seal the plant. He insisted that sealing of the plant is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has asked the High Court to dispose of these pending applications by the end of next week, and also restrained the disbursal of the compensation amount for a period of ten days. On May 26, the Apex Court allowed 30 employees of LG Polymers India Ltd to supervise “round the clock safety measures” at its sealed plant in Visakhapatnam, where a gas leak in May claimed 12 lives.