Arguing in the court of Justice I P Mukherjee, counsel for HPL Pratap Chatterjee said that Supreme Court judgement of September 2011 comprehensively adjudicated all the issues and "there is no cause of action on behalf of TCG to move the Paris-based International Council for Arbitration".
Chatterjee argued that the Supreme Court had noted that TCG had not been able to meet its commitments in bringing in funds for the company for which Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) had been allotted shares to raise much-needed finance.
He said that in larger public interest, Supreme Court findings should not be allowed for review or reconsideration by any private body like the International Council for Arbitration, the dispute settlement arm of International Chamber of Commerce.
Counsel for TCG Sudipto Sarkar said that the Supreme Court judgement did not mention about transfer of 155 million shares which was left between the two promoters to resolve among themselves.
Sarkar said that TCG had invoked the arbitration clause of the January 2002 agreement between the two promoters, the other one being West Bengal government, which ought to be resolved at the international council.
The matter had being posted for hearing tomorrow.PTI dc PR HKS
