The Supreme Court has imposed costs of Rs 10 lakh on Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) while dismissing its appeal in a two-decade-old dispute with NTPC Limited over the supply of natural gas, strongly criticising the company for repeatedly raising objections that delayed the trial.A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe noted that the suit, instituted in 2005, was still stuck at the evidence stage despite having remained pending for around 20 years. The court observed that RIL appeared to have considerable resources to continue litigation and said repeated challenges had prevented the original commercial dispute from moving towards a conclusion. The bench remarked that the company's capacity to litigate and impede the progress of the suit appeared "unlimited".
The dispute dates back to NTPC's invitation of bids for supplying natural gas to its power plants. RIL submitted a financial proposal and NTPC subsequently issued a letter of intent in June 2004.
Reliance accepted the letter subject to the terms of a draft gas sale and purchase agreement being negotiated and finalised.
NTPC later approached the court seeking a declaration that a binding agreement existed for supplying 132 trillion British thermal units of natural gas over 17 years. It alleged that RIL had failed to honour obligations arising from the letter of intent.
The latest appeal arose from an August 2024 Bombay High Court ruling concerning portions of two affidavits submitted by RIL witness BK Ganguly.
The disputed portions referred to internal emails, meetings and communications that had previously been considered irrelevant to determining whether a concluded contract existed between the two companies.
In 2019, the Supreme Court had ruled that RIL could not use oral testimony to introduce the contents of internal documents that had already been excluded from evidence.
Following that order, the Bombay High Court examined the affidavits and removed material that came within the scope of the Supreme Court's prohibition. Reliance challenged that decision before the apex court.
The Supreme Court, however, found no error in the High Court's interpretation or implementation of its earlier directions.
It also rejected RIL's attempt to invoke Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act on oral evidence, noting that substantially the same contention had already been considered by the apex court in 2019.
The bench said it saw no reason to revisit its earlier decision.
The Supreme Court took serious note of the prolonged proceedings, observing that disputes over discovery and inspection alone had taken four years. Questions surrounding the production of internal documents consumed more than a year, while litigation over redaction of evidence continued for another three years.
The court recalled that in 2019 it had expressed concern over the unexplained delay and directed that the trial be completed within nine months. Seven years later, however, the matter remained at the evidence stage.
The bench also said allowing a litigant to prolong a case reflected poorly on the manner in which courts managed proceedings.
Dismissing RIL's appeal, the Supreme Court directed the Bombay High Court to ensure that the suit is decided as expeditiously as possible.
It also ordered Reliance Industries to deposit Rs 10 lakh with the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association within five weeks.