High Court asks cricket body if it will seek extra water for IPL pitches, ground

The Bombay High Court today sought to know from the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) if it would seek additional water supply from the Pune civic body for ground and pitch maintenance for six IPL matches shifted to that city from Chennai.

The MCA stadium at Gahunje in Pune will host the remaining six ‘home’ matches of IPL franchise Chennai Super Kings (CSK) after these were shifted from the southern city following protests over the Cauvery water-sharing issue in the Tamil Nadu capital.

A division bench of justices A S Oka and Riyaz Chagla sought the MCA response while hearing a public interest litigation filed by NGO Loksatta Movement in 2016.

Opposing holding of IPL matches in Maharashtra, the NGO had raised concerns over water usage for ground management at a time when the state was reeling under drought.

The bench was today informed by the petitioner’s lawyer that while originally 11 matches were to be played in Maharashtra during the ongoing IPL, six games, which were to be played in Chennai, have now been shifted to Pune.

The lawyer argued that the Pune city and rural areas of the district were already facing water shortage.

The judges then sought to know from the MCA, which manages the stadium, if it would be seeking more water than what is being already supplied to it by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC).

Last week, the high court had posed the same query to the Mumbai Cricket Association, which manages the Wankhede stadium, another IPL venue.

The court had asked the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) if it would supply additional water to the stadium in South Mumbai.

The BMC today filed an affidavit, saying no special water supply would be given to the stadium.

The court posted the petition for further hearing on April 18.

The M A Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai was the home ground of the Mahendra Singh Dhoni-led CSK. The IPL franchise played its first home match on April 10 against the Kolkata Knight Riders.

Political parties and other groups in Tamil Nadu had demanded that all the IPL matches scheduled in Chennai be cancelled till the Centre forms the Cauvery Water Management Board. They held protests in support of their demand.

The Supreme Court had on February 16 pronounced its verdict on the Cauvery dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.

“The matches had to be shifted out of Chennai as police had said that they were unable to provide security in the prevailing situation” IPL Chairman Rajv Shukla had said on April 12.

M S Dhoni wins legal battle, arbitrator favours him

Indian cricket team captain M S Dhoni who wins matches on cricket field has won another battle in legal field. Dhoni who knows only winning  has sweep the legal ground by defeating  the State-owned Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Limited (KSDL) in a five-year-long legal wrangle, with the arbitrator, former Karnataka High Court judge Justice R Gururajan, ruling in favour of the cricketer.

 The KSDL had dragged M S Dhoni to the court alleging that he had violated the terms and conditions of an advertisement contract, which he had signed in 2006. The arbitrator also rejected KSDL’s demand for Rs 6.5 crore in damages.

 According to Manjunath Paranjape, power of attorney holder for M S Dhoni, the arbitrator rejected the claim of Rs 6.5 crore in damages by the KSDL, which had cited a loss of reven­ue after Dhoni allegedly br­eached a two-year contract he signed with it in January 2006.

 Dhoni was served with a court notice following a petition by the KSDL, which had also claimed that Dhoni did not furnish the Rs 40-lakh compensation after he “breached” the two-year contract.

The KSDL had contended that the cricketer had not given even 10 days of promotional work. Following this, his contract was terminated in December 2007.

 Justice of High Court judge

 Abdul Nazeer, who heard the matter, had on mutual consensus appointed Justice Gururajan arbitrator to resolve the matter in 2009.

 The arbitrator had conducted 17 hearings. According to Dhoni’s counsel, the KSDL’s claim was rejected as “necessary documents” were not furnished before the arbitrator.

 “Though the KSDL claimed that as per the Nielson report (an Australian company which did a market survey of KSDL) the State-owned company had suffered severe losses after Dhoni failed to appear for the shoot. However, the company could not prove this during the arbitration,” said Paranjape.

 As per the agreement and the promotion endorsement, between January 2006 and December 2007, Dhoni was to make himself available for five shoots. “Out of these, he appeared for three shoots. Two events were cancelled.

 On one occasion, Dhoni was supposed to attend an emergency meeting of the Board of Control for Cricket in India in Mumbai. And on the second occasion, the KSDL itself cancelled the shoot stating that the managing director was out of station,” Paranjape added.