RKEC PROJECTS LIMITED Vs. MAHARASHTRA MARITIME BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Petition filed under Sec. 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) seeking interim measures before commencement of arbitral proceedings. Disputes and differences have arisen between the parties out of performance of contract dtd. 11/10/2024 awarded by Respondent No. 1 to the Petitioner for construction of Passenger Jetty and Terminal Facilities at Radio Club, near Gateway of India, Mumbai. Petitioner expresses an apprehension that the contract is likely to be terminated by Respondent No.1, who may invoke and encash the Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) aggregating to Rs.11.33 crores and Mobilization Advance Bank Guarantee (MABG) in the sum of Rs.20.53 crores. Petitioner has accordingly filed the present Petition seeking restraint order against the Respondents from terminating the Agreement dtd. 11/10/2024 and from preventing it from discharging the obligations under the Agreement dtd. 11/10/2024. Petitioner has also sought restraint order against the Respondents from encashing the PBG and MABG. Petitioner has also sought direction for release of balance amount of second installment i.e. 5% mobilisation advance under the agreement. Petitioner has also sought direction for release of stage wise payments to it as per the Agreement.

(2.) On 8/9/2024, Respondent No. 1- Maharashtra Maritime Board floated a tender for construction of Passenger Jetty and Terminal Facilities at Radio Club near Gateway of India, Mumbai (Project). Petitioner was selected as the successful bidder and Letter of Award dtd. 3/10/2024 was issued in its favour. On 11/10/2024, the Work Order was issued in favour of the Petitioner and Engineering Procurement and Construction Agreement dtd. 11/10/2024 (Contract) was executed between the Petitioner and Respondent No.1. The scope of the Project included design and construction of elliptical jetty, terminal platform, approach jetty and related facilities at Radio Club near Gateway of India, Mumbai. The period of work envisaged under the Contract was for 30 months from 11/10/2024 to 11/4/2027. In pursuance of the Contract, Petitioner has deposited various Bank Guarantees in favour of Respondent No.1 comprising of PBGs aggregating Rs.11.33 crores and MABG in the sum of Rs.20.53 crores.

(3.) Petitioner accuses Respondents for delay in execution and progress of the work on the Project. According to it, Respondents were responsible for providing General Arrangement Drawings (GAD) of parking platform and approach jetty. Petitioner holds Respondents responsible for delay in finalization of the GADs. According to the Petitioner, Mumbai Port Authority issued Circular dtd. 17/4/2025 imposing prohibition of "No Cold Moves" from 1/6/2025 to 15/9/2025 and 107 days were lost on that account. According to the Petitioner, 189 days were lost in the process of deck elevation approval and finalisation of GADs by Respondents and their consultants at IIT Madras. On 15/9/2025, after expiry of 'No Cold Move', meeting took place between the representatives of the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 in which Petitioner was called upon to submit schedule in the form of bar chart. Petitioner submitted the revised schedule on 24/9/2025. On 14/10/2025, Respondents proposed imposition of liquidated damages. Petitioner had received mobilization advance of Rs.19.35 crores. Petitioner requested for extension of time by 308 days and for revision of project completion date to 15/2/2028. Considering the limited remit of enquiry in the present Petition, it is not necessary to go into the details of correspondence and events which have occurred during performance of contract by the Petitioner. However, it needs to be noted that two Writ Petitions were filed in this Court, challenging implementation of the Project. The petitions came to be dismissed by this Court on 15/7/2025. The Special Leave Petition has also been dismissed by the Supreme Court. Petitioner relies upon statements made by Respondent No.1 in its affidavits filed in the said Writ Petitions admitting that considerable work at the site was carried out and substantial amount was expended on the Project.