Bhubaneswar: Former Supreme Court judge Justice Vineet Saran has questioned the basis of a Singapore-seated arbitral tribunal’s award of more than Rs 5,500 crore against Tata Power in favour of Kleros, arguing that the damages appeared to rest on assumptions about future profits rather than actual investment or project execution.
His remarks on the NewsX’s legal show Legally Speaking follow concerns raised by former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and come amid a series of reports published by Deccan Chronicle examining the award, its damages calculation and allegations of potential conflicts of interest involving members of the arbitral tribunal.
Justice Saran said he had not examined the complete case record but was concerned by reports that Kleros had neither executed the proposed project nor made any substantial investment towards it.
In the show, Justice Saran referred to Kleros as a ‘Letter Box Company.’ “Not a single brick was laid, not a single rupee was invested,” he observed, questioning how such circumstances could lead to compensation of approximately $550 million.
The dispute arose from a proposed Russian coal-mining project. The tribunal had held Tata Power liable in 2023 and subsequently awarded damages in 2025. The majority reportedly assessed compensation at about $490.32 million, with interest, while the Indian arbitrator, Justice A.K. Ganguly, took a sharply different view, assessing damages at around $13.5 million.
The divergence has intensified scrutiny of the tribunal’s approach to calculating loss of opportunity and projected future earnings.
Justice Saran also questioned the handling of allegations of bias against tribunal members. He said the substantive merits of the allegations should have been examined rather than dismissing them on the ground that they were raised belatedly.
The concerns echo those raised by Rohatgi, who questioned the award’s legal and commercial basis and highlighted alleged non-disclosures involving arbitrators and connections linked to the opposing side’s third-party funder.
As Deccan Chronicle reported earlier, Tata Power challenged the award in Singapore, raising issues including alleged apparent bias and disclosure obligations. The Singapore International Commercial Court dismissed Tata Power’s applications on August 26, 2026, prompting attention to the next stage of the legal challenge.
Justice Saran also called for stronger Indian arbitration institutions and greater confidence in domestic dispute-resolution mechanisms, particularly in high-value disputes involving Indian companies.
The controversy has widened the debate over evidentiary standards, speculative damages and safeguards against conflicts of interest in international arbitration. The competing positions and pending legal proceedings remain central to the dispute.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
