Tata Sons disappointed with lack of cooperation from DoCoMo

In a statement, Tata Sons said it is ready to pay the partner, but within the constraints of the law.

By: ENS Economic Bureau | Mumbai | Published:September 5, 2016 12:52 am
raghuram rajan, rajan, rbi, rbi governor, central bank, inflation, urjit patel, india news The Tatas filed an objection in the Delhi High Court on Friday seeking to prevent enforcement of an international arbitration award in favour of NTT Docomo.

Tata Sons on Sunday said it was disappointed with the lack of cooperation from its telecom partner NTT Docomo of Japan in arriving at an “amicable resolution” in the ongoing dispute between the companies.

In a statement, Tata Sons said it is ready to pay the partner, but within the constraints of the law. “We have been disappointed with the lack of cooperation from our partner in arriving at an amicable resolution. Despite several attempts on our part, our partner has refused to come together with us to engage the government and the regulator on the issue,” it said.

“The position Tata Sons has taken in its affidavit filed in the Delhi High Court is in line with what we have stated from the outset – that Tata Sons is committed to honouring our contractual obligations to NTT Docomo, in compliance with Indian regulations and law,” Tata Sons said in the statement.

“There is a judicial process that is underway and we need to pay due heed to the laws that bind us all. Docomo is unfortunately confusing our intent to pay with what is legally payable by us. Tata’s intent is to pay but within the confines of the law,” Tatas said.

The Tatas filed an objection in the Delhi High Court on Friday seeking to prevent enforcement of an international arbitration award in favour of NTT Docomo. Apart from invoking the policy exemption that allows courts to reject an international award, the Tata group argued that NTT Docomo was aware that Reserve Bank of India’s permission would be needed for the purchase of its stake in their joint venture and argued that the the arbitration panel admittedly made an unenforceable award.