Kalindee Rail Nirman moves NCLT for revival of insolvency plea against Anil Ambani's DAMEPL

Kalindee Rail Nirman, now merged with Texmaco Rail & Engineering, has moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to revive its insolvency plea against Reliance Infrastructure’s Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL)..The plea was taken up by an NCLT bench of Judicial Member Mahendra Khandelwal and Technical Member Dr Sanjeev Ranjan, which issued a notice to DAMEPL..Kalindee, an operational creditor, had initially filed the insolvency plea in 2019 but withdrew it after reaching a settlement with DAMEPL. This settlement hinged on DAMEPL’s anticipated receipt of proceeds from a ₹2,800 crore arbitral award in its favour against Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC). However, the Supreme Court overturned the award at the curative stage in April 2024, restoring an earlier judgment by the Delhi High Court favouring DMRC. .The DAMEPL and DMRC case involves a 2008 concession agreement for the construction and operation of the Delhi Airport Express Line on a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) basis.DAMEPL terminated the agreement in 2012, citing unresolved structural defects in the metro line. DMRC contested this termination, claiming it had taken measures to fulfill its contractual obligations. The dispute was referred to arbitration, with the primary issue being the validity of DAMEPL’s termination notice dated October 8, 2012.In 2017, the arbitral tribunal ruled in favour of DAMEPL, awarding ₹2,800 crore plus interest in damages. A single judge of the Delhi High Court upheld the award in 2018, but it was overturned by a Division Bench on appeal. Subsequently, the Supreme Court reinstated the arbitral award in favour of DAMEPL, dismissing a review petition filed against its decision. This decision was later set aside after DMRC filed a curative petition..At the NCLT today, Kalindee cited the Supreme Court’s judgment and said that since DAMEPL had lost the arbitration, it had no means to pay the company back.The NCLT was, however, hesitant to entertain the plea as it would mean that there is no sanctity to any settlement it had authorised. The NCLT also noted that Kalindee could not seek to revive a petition that was disposed on the basis of a settlement half a decade ago. Kalindee contended that it had a genuine case against DAMEPL and it had come to the decision of reviving the plea only after the decision in curative petition. It was further contended that DAMEPL had no other income apart from the arbitral award amount it was expected to receive.Kalindee’s plea was filed through Advocate Yajur Sharma.