Justice S Muralidhar in his judgement will also decide whether the intervention application of the RBI, opposing the award as well as the settlement arrived at between Tata and Docomo, was maintainable.
The court as well as Tata and Docomo were of the view that only those who were party to an arbitration can object to the award.
The court questioned the maintainability of the RBI's plea to intervene in the matter when it was not a party to the arbitration between Tata and Docomo.
Under the shareholding agreement between them, on Docomo's exit from the venture within five years, Tata was to find a buyer who would purchase the Japanese company's stake at minimum 50 per cent of the acquisition price, which came to around Rs 58.45 per share.
Also Read
The other option was Tata purchasing the shares at fair market value, which was Rs 23.44. However, this was not acceptable to Docomo and it had opted for arbitration.
Docomo had moved the Delhi High Court for enforcement of the award after Tata cited refusal of permission by the RBI to make the payment.
During the arguments, Docomo's lawyers said that the
amount being sent overseas was in lieu of the damages and not for transfer of shares by way of sale.
Tata's lawyers argued that earlier the RBI was not opposed to grant of special permission for transfer of the money and it was only now the bank was saying that award was inconsistent with the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) Regulations.
The RBI, in its intervention application, had contended that the shareholding agreement was illegal and has objected to the award of damages. It has said that Docomo's shares in TTSL be purchased only at the fair market value.
The central bank had later also opposed the settlement arrived at between Tata and Docomo.
Under the settlement agreement between the two companies, Tata and Docomo have decided to settle their two-year-old dispute regarding TTSL with the Indian company withdrawing its objections to the enforcement of the award. Tata has already deposited USD 1.17 billion with the high court.