DMRC v DAMEPL (the curative petition)
Supreme Court of India · Other public awards · India · 10 April 2024
Why it matters
The most consequential Indian arbitration ruling of the decade. The Supreme Court invoked its extraordinary curative jurisdiction to reverse its own 2021 judgment and kill an award that had already survived multiple rounds, holding the award perverse and its restoration a miscarriage of justice. It saved a public body roughly Rs 8,000 crore and immediately reopened the debate India keeps having: is the country pro-enforcement or not, and what does finality mean if even the Supreme Court can take a second look at itself?
Summary
DAMEPL, a Reliance Infrastructure venture, ran Delhi's Airport Metro Express line under a concession from DMRC, the public metro operator. DAMEPL terminated the concession citing safety defects in the civil structure, and an arbitral tribunal upheld the termination in 2017, awarding it sums that with interest approached Rs 8,000 crore. The award then rode a procedural rollercoaster: a single judge of the Delhi High Court upheld it; a division bench partly set it aside as perverse; the Supreme Court in 2021 restored it; a review petition failed; and DMRC then filed a curative petition, the rarest remedy in Indian law, available only to prevent a gross miscarriage of justice after everything else is exhausted. In April 2024 a three-judge bench led by the Chief Justice allowed it. The court held the tribunal had ignored vital evidence, including that the line in fact ran safely after rectification under fresh safety certification, rendering the award perverse and irrational, and that the 2021 restoration had itself caused a grave miscarriage of justice. The division bench's setting aside was restored, and amounts paid under enforcement became refundable. The court stressed curative power must remain exceptional, but the message landed everywhere: in India, even a Supreme Court win on an award may not be the end. The case is now the centrepiece of every debate on judicial interference, perversity as a ground, and enforcement risk in Indian infrastructure arbitration.
The detail
Parties: Delhi Metro Rail Corporation v Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt Ltd (a Reliance Infrastructure venture)
Case number: Curative Petition (C) Nos. 108-109 of 2022, Supreme Court of India
Outcome: The Supreme Court used its rarest power to undo its own earlier ruling and set aside an arbitral award worth around Rs 8,000 crore with interest.
Quantum: Award of about Rs 8,000 crore (with interest) set aside
Applicable law: Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (India), sections 34 and 37; Article 142 of the Constitution and the curative jurisdiction under Rupa Ashok Hurja.
Issues in play: Finality of arbitral awards, and finality of the Supreme Court itself, against the need to correct a grave miscarriage of justice. How many layers of review can an award survive or fail?
Read the full decision at Supreme Court of India ↗
Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.