The Supreme Court on Monday, November 2, dismissed the Central government's appeal against a Delhi High Court judgment that allowed the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in favour of Vedanta Limited and Ravva Oil (Singapore) Pte Limited, and sharply criticised the Centre for frustrating awards that date back to 2004 and 2016, Bar and Bench and Law Trend reported.

Source: Bar and Bench

A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manmohan questioned the government's arguments at the enforcement stage. "What are these arguments? You are frustrating an arbitral award like this? At the stage of enforcement of it?" the Court remarked, warning, "Nobody will trust you," and noting the contradiction of promoting arbitration at conferences while resisting enforcement of awards for decades.

Dismissing the appeal, the Bench held: "We are of the view that no error, not to speak of any error of law, could be said to have been committed by the High Court in passing the impugned judgment and order." Additional Solicitor General Vikramjeet Banerjee appeared for the Central government; Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Akhil Sibal had appeared for Vedanta and Ravva Oil before the Delhi High Court.

Source: Law Trend

A dispute that began in 1994

The litigation arises from a production sharing contract signed in 1994 between the Central government and a consortium of companies to develop the Ravva oil field in the Krishna-Godavari Basin. Disputes over the contract went to arbitration in Kuala Lumpur, where a tribunal passed a partial award in October 2004, leaving quantification open; Malaysia's Federal Court upheld that award in 2011.

In July 2014 the government issued show-cause notices seeking recovery of approximately $99 million from the companies. A reconstituted tribunal passed a final award in October 2016. The Centre opposed enforcement on grounds of limitation, public policy and the argument that the tribunal had become functus officio — that it had exhausted its authority.

On July 1, 2026, Justice Jasmeet Singh of the Delhi High Court rejected those objections, holding that the enforcement petition was within limitation and that the tribunal retained jurisdiction over quantification, and directed the release of bank guarantees. Monday's dismissal leaves those directions undisturbed, so enforcement of the awards can now proceed.