07.10.

2017
JINDAL INDIA THERMAL POWER LTD. – LEGAL CASES.
S.No. COMPANY AMOUNT SUBJECT PRESENT STATUS NEXT
(Rs. In Lakhs) DATE OF
HEARING
ARBITRATION CASES:

1. QUARTZ Award Amount: Rs.6,27,71,936 Arbitration Case dated 04.04.2013 before the Objection u/s 34 is -
INFRA ENGG Pendentalite Intt: Rs.2,68,35,002 Arbitral Tribunal consisting of Shri S.B. Sinha, filed before District
PVT LTD. Arbitration cost : Rs. 75,00,000 Presiding Arbitrator (Former Justice of Supreme Court at Angul,
TOTAL : Rs.9,71,06,938 Court), Shri R C Chopra (Former Justice of Delhi which is admitted on
AND + 18% interest till actual High Court) and Shri P S Rao, Co-Arbitrator. 30.06.2017.
payment.
JINDAL INDIA M/s. Quartz Infra & Engg. Pvt. Ltd. (Quartz) was
THERMAL awarded five contracts in the year 2011-12 of a total
POWER LTD. value of Rs.58,04,96,972/- for construction of
various projects at Distt. Angul, Odisha. Quartz had
executed works worth Rs.8,52,40,525/-. The
pending works under the contracts that remained
to be executed were given to other contractors by
JITPL for execution at the risk and cost of Quartz.
Quartz invoked Arbitration against JITPL raising
claims to the tune of Rs.30,63,86,755/-. JITPL has
filed its Counter-claims against Quartz for
liquidated damages, risk and cost etc. to the tune of
Rs.37,02,45,855/-.
Majority Award dated 21.02.2017 (received on
24.02.2017) was passed by Hon'ble Tribunal.
Company is in the process of filing objections u/s
34 of the Arbitration Act.

1
2. KSS PETRON Amt. of claim of Arbitration Case No. ARB.P.245/2015 dated Stage of Arguments 11.10.2017
PVT LTD. Petron : Rs.91,41,90,494 19.4.2015 before the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of
+ interest + Cost Justice Shri Manmohan Sarin, Presiding Arbitrator,
AND Justice Shri R C Chopra, Arbitrator and Er. P.K.
Counter-claim Gupta, Arbitrator.
JINDAL INDIA by JITPL : Rs.34,90,46,489
THERMAL M/s. KSS Petron (Petron) was awarded a contract
POWER LTD. to the tune of Rs.100 Crores for construction of civil
and structural works of BTG package at the project
site in Distt. Angul, Odisha on 20.10.2011, which
was to be completed by 19.10.2012. The said
contract was subsequently revised and the contract
price was reduced to Rs.87 Crores. JITPL encashed
the Bank Guarantee of Rs.15 Crores in November,
2014 furnished by Petron and terminated the
contract. Subsequently, Petron invoked arbitration
and raised claims to the tune of Rs.91,41,90,494/-
which includes claim of Rs.59,77,78,448/- towards
damages JITPL has filed its counterclaims to the
tune of Rs.34,90,46,489/-. As per the counter claims
filed by JITPL,
JITPL was asked to directly pay the vendors of
Petron, consequently, JITPL had paid an excess
amount of approx. Rs.7 Crores to Petron. All
Pleadings in regard to the arbitration have been
completed by the parties. Final Arguments on
behalf of Petron concluded on 01.12.2016. Listed
for arguments on behalf of JITPL on 11.10.2017.

2
3. TECPRO Amt. of claim of M/s. Tecpro Systems Limited (Tecpro) was Pleadings completed. 10.09.2017
SYSTEMS LTD. Tecpro : Rs.548,66,66,752 awarded three contracts/Letters of Intent on
15.06.2010 to the tune of Rs.200 Crores for
AND Amt. of claim of implementation of coal handling plants and Mine
JITPL. :Rs.181,57,52,726 Conveyor System for 2x600 MV Coal based power
JINDAL INDIA plant at Angul, Odisha. The scheduled completion
THERMAL for the contract was 14.02.2012 i.e. within 20 months
POWER LTD. from the date of award of the contract. JITPL
encashed the bank guarantees furnished by Tecpro
by approx.Rs.51 crores citing delay under the
contract. Subsequently, Tecpro invoked arbitration
against JITPL and raised claims of
Rs.548,66,66,752/- which includes claim of Rs.429
Crores towards damages. JITPL has filed its
counter-claims to the tune of Rs.181,57,52,726
Pleading by parties to arbitration has been
completed and the case is sub-judice before the
Arbitration Tribunal. Admission/Denial to be
done by JITPL. Evidence to be filed by both parties.

4.(a) SIEMENS LTD. Amount of Claim of Siemens: Siemens appointed their Arbitrator- Justice (Retd) - .
Vs. JITPL Vikramjit Sen, Ex-Justice of Supreme Court.
BEFORE DELHI Rs.5,11,76,042/- However, JITPL had not appointed its nominee
HIGH COURT. Arbitrator, therefore, Siemens invoked Section 11 of
[Contract No. 279 dated Arbitration Act, 1996 in which hearing held on
PETITION U/S 17.09.2011; and Contract No. 280 28.07.2017 and judgment on appointment of
11 OF dated 17.09.2011] Arbitrator reserved.
ARBITRATION
&
CONCILIATION
ACT, 1996.

3
 (b) SIEMENS LTD. Amount of Claim of Siemens: Siemens appointed their Arbitrator – Justice (Retd.) Preliminary sitting
Vs. JITPL Aftab Alam, Ex-Justice of Supreme Court. was held on
BEFORE Rs. 7,83,28,887 + Rs.2,18,50,593 07.09.2017.
ARBITRAL = Rs. 10,01,79,480/- We have appointed our Arbitrator – Justice (Retd.)
TRIBUNAL. Mr. Deepak Verma, Ex-Justice of Supreme Court.
[Contract No. 127 dated
09.06.2010 and Contract No.128
dated 09.06.2010]

ROYALTY ON MINERALS:

5(a) JITPL Vs. Demand : Rs.3,60,66,926 Challenge of demand of Rs.3,60,66,926/- by Tehsildar, Pending before Orissa
STATE OF Kaniha in respect of Royalty on Minor Minerals used by High Court.
ORISSA – W.P. JITPL for the project. No Order has yet passed in the
(C) No.11775 of matter.
2011 BEFORE
ORISSA HIGH
COURT.

(b) Demand Notice Demand : Rs.21,76,100 Demand of Royalty of Rs.21,76,100/- has been raised by Pending before
issued by Tehsildar, Kaniha, Orissa for excavation of earth for Tehsildar, Kaniha,
Tehsildar, levelling of land in plant area, under Orissa Minor Orissa.
Kaniha, Orissa. Minerals Rules, 2004.

LEVY OF ENTRY TAX:

6. JITPL Vs. Demand from July 2010 to The Company has challenged levy of Entry Tax on the Liability of
STATE OF March, 2016 : power equipment purchased by the Company from differential tax and
ORISSA – W.P. Rs.57,49,35,813 outside the State of Orissa on the following two grounds: interest shall arise.
(c) No.14254 OF (a) There is no quid pro quo by the State Government.
2010 BEFORE Deposited till March, Entry Tax can be used only for the benefit of the industry
ORISSA HIGH 2016 : Rs.19,16,45,255 from which tax is collected unlike general taxation. On
COURT. this ground, constitutional validity has been challenged.

4
 Balance: Rs.38,32,90,558 (b) State has no power to levy Entry Tax on the power
equipment imported from other States and which are not
+ Interest. manufactured in the State of Orissa. Company has been
filing various Petitions / Stay Applications and the
Hon'ble High Court has been granting stay of Entry tax
on deposit of 1/3rd of the demand and on furnishing
security for balance 2/3rd of the demand.
(c) One Writ Petition which was originally filed by us
challenging Constitutional validity of Entry Tax Act, was
dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court in view of the earlier
Orissa High Court decision in case of Reliance Industries
Ltd. The present Civil Writ Petition is filed before
Supreme Court against the said Order.
(d) The issue has been decided by Constitution Bench (9
Members) of Supreme Court on 11.11.2016 in Civil Appeal
No.3453/2002 against the company/assessee. Our SLP to
come up in due course, to be decided by regular bench of
Supreme Court as per Judgment dated 11.11.2016 of
Constitutional Bench. Representations filed before
Authorities.

7. MAHANADI Rs. 497 Lacs Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (MCL), an Undertaking of Writ Petition pending
COALFIELDS Coal India Limited on supply of poor quality of Coal to
LTD. vs. JITPL the Company against the quality of Coal purchased in e-
W.P.(C) No. Auction from Nandira and Talcher Mines. Despite
14707 OF 2016 repeated reminders the examination of Coal by
BEFORE independent Agency was not permitted. Therefore, we
ORISSA HIGH have not lifted some of the quantity for which our EMD
COURT. amount to Rs.1.34 crores were forfeited. In addition, we
have incurred damages amounting to Rs.4.97 crores
towards poor quality of Coal supply. We have filed Writ
Petition for the above claims before the Hon'ble Orissa
High Court.

5
8. JITPL Vs. Rs.120 Crores Government of Odisha had issued Resolution in May, Stay granted to us by
STATE OF 2015 to demand Water Conservation Fund (WCF) @ Rs.2.5 Orissa High Court.
ODISHA; AND crores per cusec of water. A demand for an amount of Pending before Orissa
EXECUTIVE Rs.120 crores to be paid in 5 annual instalments High Court.
ENGINEER, (calculated on 48 cusecs of water) has been demanded.
DEPTT. OF The Company has challenged the said demand in Orissa
WATER High Court on the constitutional ground.
RESOURCES, Vide Order dated 24.06.2016 stay has been granted by
GOVT.OF High Court.
ODISHA
BEFORE
ORISSA HIGH
COURT. W.P.
No.10454/2016.

9. JITPL vs. STATE Rs.2.78 Crores Writ Petition was filed in Orissa High Court challenging Stay granted.
OF ODISHA & Towards energy bill of the demand of Odisha Environment Management Fund Pending before Orissa
ORS. – WP(C) # Dec. 2016; and (OEMF) @ 6 paise per unit of Electricity sent outside the High Court.
3155/2017 State of Odisha. The alleged demand was raised as per
BEFORE Rs.2.57 Crores MOU. The conditions of MOU do not provide so. The
ORISSA HIGH Towards energy bill of Stay Order was passed by Hon'ble Orissa High Court vide
COURT. Jan.2017 towards Order dated 27.03.2017. The Department is yet to file the
contribution to OEMF and reply.
future liability.
In the said petition, we have also claimed refund of
Rs.2,78,84,349/- and Rs.2,57,67,660/- towards amount
deducted by GRIDCO from the energy bills of December,
2016 and January, 2017 towards OEMF.

10. JITPL vs. Demand : Rs.12,86,13,224 JITPL has challenged retrospective levy of District Granted stay vide
UNION OF Mineral Foundation (DMF) vide Notification dated Orders dated

6
 INDIA & ORS. – 31.08.2016 effective from 12.01.2015 by retrospective effect 08.02.2017 and
WP(C) No.1625 to Section 9(b) of MMDR Act, 2015 and consequential 10.03.2017.
OF 2017 Demand Notice dated 30.09.2016 amounting to
BEFORE Rs.12,86,13,224.30. The Hon'ble High Court granted stay
ORISSA HIGH vide Orders dated 08.02.2017 and 10.03.2017.
COURT.

11. JITPL vs. STATE Demand: Rs.24,88,14,993 The Government had made a demand of Rs.24,88,14,993/- Stay granted.
OF ODISHA & and future demand. towards Electricity duty on Auxiliary consumption of Pending before Orissa
ORS. – W.P.(C) electricity by JITPL. While making the demand, the High Court.
No. 3157/2017 Government had treated JITPL as Captive Generating
BEFORE Plant. The demand was challenged on the ground that the
ORISSA HIGH relevant charging section 3 of Orissa Electricity (Duty)
COURT. Act, 1961 does not include Auxiliary consumption. The
Hon'ble High Court granted stay of recovery vide Order
dated 08.03.2017 and the same continuing. A Counter
Affidavit has been filed by the Respondent and a
Rejoinder to the same is being prepared by us.

12. JITPL vs. Amount to be calculated JITPL had entered into an Agreement with PGCIL for Pending before
POWER GRID availing Long Term Open Access (LTOA) vide Bulk CERC, New Delhi.
CORPN. OF Power Transmission Agreement (BPTA) dated 13.05.2010
INDIA LTD. & for 1200 MW. Thereafter the entire quantity of LTOA was
ANR. relinquished by JITPL on the ground of Force Majeure and
PETITIONS inability of JITPL to avail the LTOA because of non-
No.55/MP/2015 availability of Long Term PPAs. As per Regulation 18 of
No.92/MP/2015 CERC (Grant of connectivity, Long Term Access and
BEFORE Medium Term Open Access in Inter-State Transmission
CENTRAL and Related Matters) Regulations, 2009, Power Producers
ELECTRICITY can relinquish the LTOA on payment of Relinquishment
REGULATORY charges as per Regulations in respect of standard capacity.
COMMISSION For this purpose, a Committee was formed by CERC to
NEW DELHI.

7
 decide upon standard capacity. The report of Committee
has been received by CERC. Matter is yet to be decided.

13. JITPL vs. CESU Refund of Security JITPL had entered into Agreement with CESU (Central Pending before
[Central deposit of Rs.13,06,04,400 Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha), for availing OERC, Odisha.
Electricity Supply and interest amount of construction power on 03.10.2013. The Agreement was
Utility of Orissa – Rs.2.95 Crores. for 5 years. Since the Power Plant of JITPL had already
Petition No.52 OF come and JITPL did not require power, JITPL requested
2016 BEFORE
for refund of Security Deposit of Rs.13,06,04,400/- and
OSERC, ODISHA.
interest. CESU did not refund the money, therefore,
Petition was filed before OERC.
Judgment reserved by OERC on 11.05.2017.