Senior advocates engage in verbal duel in SC over Adani Power’s plea

Singhvi told the bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice P V Sanjay Kumar that the applications were filed in terms of two earlier orders of the SC allowing it to approach the “appropriate forum” for payment of the surcharge.

As Dave remarked that the application was an abuse of the process of the court, Singhvi took objection and said “the use of adjectives like abuse itself is an abuse of the process of the court”.

Stating that he would address the court on the point of maintainability or the application, Singhvi said he had approached the SC believing it was the “appropriate forum”, adding that he was ready to withdraw the plea and approach the “appropriate forum”.

“Let us not deal with such matters by innuendo and insinuation. Let us deal with it in a reasonable, practicable manner… I have been prosecuting these applications because we bonafide believe that these orders entitle us to”, said Singhvi.

Dave opposed the request for withdrawal and said it should not be granted in “larger public interest” as “Rs 1,400 crore is sought to be extracted from the state”.

Singhvi said Dave was getting into the merits of the matter which he (Singhvi) did not. “Don’t tell me what I should argue”, Dave shot back.

Dave said that the prayer raised in the application had already been dealt with by the court in the judgment and the petitioners had not filed a review petition against it.

As the matter proceeded, Dave told Singhvi, “You wanted to grab an order from this court. That’s why you tried to shortcut it”.

Singhvi objected to Dave’s choice of words but the latter stood his ground. Dave said the application could not have been registered by the SC registry according to applicable rules. But the bench wondered how it can leave the decision on what application can be filed and what cannot be to the subjective satisfaction of the registry.

Dave accused Adani Power of “making false statements and trying to win over the kindness of the court. They accepted the judgment and two years later file the application”. He added there can be no remedy after a judgment of the SC.

Justice Bose said, “Your argument will be right if that point has been foreclosed by a judgment of this court”.

Singhvi sought to argue saying he, unlike Dave, “will throw more light than heat”.

“Light unfortunately comes only from those who have a doctorate”, Dave said, apparently taking a swipe at Singhvi, who has a PhD.

“I confess to having earned a doctorate but that doesn’t mean I only have to throw heat”, responded Singhvi.

As Dave sought to interject, Singhvi said, “Allow petitioner and applicant to open and allow me to talk nonsense for a while…”.

As tempers flared, Dave said, “Judgment of SC is not nonsense. I take strong exception. Duly delivered judgment of the SC, you call it nonsense!”

Singhvi clarified, “I said allow me to give my nonsense. It’s nonsensical to say that I called SC judgment nonsense. I said allow me to spew my nonsense and allow Your Lordships to correct it… My learned loves to deliberately mishear, and do his histrionics”.

“No no I am not capable. You are the best lawyer of this country. Throw light how this is maintainable”, Dave shot back.

“All this thumping the desk, giving adjectives, shouting, what’s all this My Lord. We are not here to get browbeaten by anyone”, said Singhvi.

Trying to cool tempers, the bench advised the two sides to take a coffee break.

The arguments on law continued and the court finally reserved its order.