Supreme Court hears Himachal Pradesh's original suit over Satluj-Yamuna link row

AG Venkataramani: Himachal is in concurrence

Sr Adv Nidhesh Gupta (for Punjab): Deficit on electricity 13066 metric units...we say this calculation does not account for [...] units which were given during a certain period...another is a 15 year thing

CJI: Are you still negotiating? Otherwise we will take on record the note and [hear]

AG: There is no more negotiation

Gupta: We are leaving to your lordships. We are not agitating.

AG: this note is a product of many engagements over time. suggestion was convert financial aspect into a non-financial...how much energy will be supplied...we have prepared cashless settlement. at highest level, there has been deliberations between ministers, CMs. this note is the result

Sr Adv Kapil Sibal (for HP): Interest @ 6% we have given up. we have paid loan also. we don't want to re-open the whole thing

Gupta: we also don't want to reopen. just a factual thing

Order: Union of India has held several meetings to find out solution for pending proceedings...suit of HP was decreed in part. A comprehensive note filed by ld. AG laying down modalities for implementation of decree. the proposal is acceptable in entirety by HP and Haryana. However, Punjab has part reservation on factual issue for which liberty is granted to submit a note on 24th.