Bar&Bench News Network

Nov 19, 2009

Additional Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran, on Wednesday asserted in the Supreme Court that any arrangement between the Ambani brothers for the supply of gas from the K G Basin has to be approved by it in national interest.

"The MoU between the Ambani brothers cannot override public policy on gas supply and utilization," Parasaran told the Supreme Court. Supplementing his arguments, Additional Solicitor General Vivek Tankha added, "The MoU is a family arrangement while the Production Sharing Agreement is an arrangement for the country". "We are concerned with the protection of natural resources which is not limited to this case but for all times to come. People's right has to be protected," he argued.

The Bench however, remained unimpressed with the submissions and had Tankha yielding to their observation that his submissions were not a part of the record in the Bombay High Court.

Meanwhile, a disgruntled Harish Salve, updated his status message on popular social networking site, Twitter to, "Cant believe that judges of the supreme court have the kind of patience it takes to hear the Gas case the way it is being heard."

 

 

 

Add to My Clips Print this Story Email this Story

 

Facebook LinkedIn MySpace Digg Del.icio.us twitter

Comments(0)




Be the first to post a comment 

Post Your Comment

Name* :

Location :

Email Id :

Comment * :

Notify me when there is a comment


 

The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?

bullets

 

May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the  comments (4)

 

 

Thank you. Comments are subject to moderation.