Reading Time: 3 minutes
M/s Mytrah Vayu (Sabarmati) Private Limited, a company engaged in electricity generation through its 250 MW Wind Power Plant in Tamil Nadu, faced challenges leading to a delay in the project’s commissioning. The parent company, M/s Mytrah Energy (India) Private Limited, secured the project through a bidding process conducted by the Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited (SECI).
The project, aimed at contributing to India’s renewable energy goals, experienced delays in its scheduled commercial operation date (SCoD) due to various factors. The initial SCoD was set for October 4, 2018, but was later revised to November 13, 2018, considering law and order issues and the imposition of Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Despite efforts, the company faced challenges and could only commission 128.79 MW by January 29, 2019, with subsequent phases completed in April and May of the same year.
One major contention from M/s Mytrah Vayu was the claim of force majeure events impacting the project’s implementation. The company cited the Cyclone Ockhi, which hit Tamil Nadu’s coast in November 2017, causing severe disruptions to the early construction phase. The cyclone’s impact on infrastructure and black cotton soil hindered progress, leading to a delay of more than two months.
Another significant challenge was the unprecedented heavy rainfall in September and October 2018, coupled with Cyclone Gaja in November 2018. The project site, spread across 13 villages, experienced floods, making internal pathways impassable and causing delays in construction activities. Despite the Petitioner’s efforts to resume normalcy, the aftermath of the cyclone led to a delay of two months in construction.
The company also highlighted a nationwide truckers’ strike in July 2018 as a factor affecting project activities. While the petitioner intimated SECI about the impact, the lack of a Force Majeure Notice and supporting evidence raised concerns.
Delays in obtaining approvals and clearances also played a role, notably with Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL). The petitioner claimed that PGCIL’s six-month delay in approving drawings and providing manufacturing clearance contributed to the overall project delay. However, SECI countered that such clearances were within the petitioner’s responsibilities.
Additionally, the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) caused recalibration of vendor agreements, leading to delays in finalizing contracts and procurement. Despite the petitioner’s notices to SECI, concerns regarding GST’s impact on project execution were not addressed.
SECI, on the other hand, emphasized the petitioner’s obligation to adhere to the agreed-upon schedule and raised concerns about the lack of evidence supporting the impact of alleged force majeure events. The regulatory body argued that liquidated damages were justified for delays in commissioning.
The dispute between M/s Mytrah Vayu and SECI revolves around the causes of the project delay and the subsequent imposition of liquidated damages. The company argues for force majeure relief, citing cyclones, heavy rainfall, a truckers’ strike, delays in approvals, and the GST implementation. SECI contends that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence and adhered to the agreed-upon schedule. As the matter concludes, M/s Mytrah Vayu seeks the release of its Performance Bank Guarantee, emphasizing the challenges faced during the project’s execution.
Please view the document below for more details.
