9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anies (Court) Rules, 1959 contending interalia that respondent company is incorporated in the State of Karnataka and it entered into a Sub- Concession agreements with petitioner on 27.11.2009 Annexure-A and Annexure-B whereunder petitioner granted to the respondent, Sub-Concessionaire rights to carry on the business at terminal 2C and terminal 1A respectively at Mumbai International Airport as per the terms and conditions set out in the respective agreements which came to into effect on 12.11.2009 and for a period of three years with lock-in-period of 12 months after having paid security deposit to the petitioner in a sum of Rs. 24,20,000/-. It is contended that under said sub-concession agreements respondent had agreed to pay to the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by respondent by denying its liability on vague grounds by its reply dated 21.03.2012. It is contended that the petitioner having made all efforts to persuade the respondent to pay the said admitted amount same has not been paid and it is contended that current financial condition of the respondent is not sound and it is unable to pay its debt and since respondent company is in financial difficulty and it is deemed to pay its debt and as such it is liable to be wound up. 4. This court ordered notice of the present petition and on service of notice respondent appeared and filed its detailed statement of objections denying the averments made in the petition. Respondent has admitted entering into sub-concession agreements with the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ai International Airport Limited and as such it was agreed that from out of the security deposit furnished at the time of commencement of said agreement the amounts payable by respondent can be deducted and balance if any would be cleared by respondent subject to necessary documents being furnished to the respondent by the petitioner in that regard. It is contended that despite communications sent to petitioner as per Annexures- R-2 to R-8 seeking clarifications with supporting documents from petitioner it was not furnished and as such it is contended that there is no amount due and payable by the respondent to petitioner. It is also contended by learned counsel for respondent that statutory notice issued has been suitably replied and when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent unilaterally abandoned both the premises on 05.07.2010. The specific plea raised by the petitioner in this regard reads as under: "12. On 5th July 2010, the Respondent unilaterally abandoned both the premises viz. Terminal 1A and Terminal 2C and thereby willfully breaching the said Agreements. By reason of the said breaches the petitioner has suffered harm, prejudice and injury both to their reputation and business operations". (Emphasis supplied by me) 8. Above undisputed fact would clearly indicate that within a short span of eight months from the date of commencement of kiosks/food chain respondent had stopped its business at terminal 1A and terminal 2C. On the one hand petitioner contends that respondent unilaterally abandon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will have to take this up with Senior Management and will revert. Finance is working on the total dues. As per the agreement, the lock in period is One year and if you decide to leave then have to pay for the remaining period. Please be advised that you can only remove the perishables from the stores and nothing else till the accounts are settled". 10. This would clearly indicate that petitioner- company was fully aware of the termination of the contract by the petitioner in July, 2010 itself and the claim of the petitioner with regard to minimum monthly guarantee fee payable by respondent to petitioner was agreed upon between the parties as per the Sub- Concession Agreement dated 27.11.2009. 11. Petitioner has invoked Sections 433(e), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substantially. Petitioner on the one hand has contended that as per Clause 2 of the Agreement there was lock-in-period for 12 months and the company has to pay the rents for the said 12 months apart from electricity and other charges. 13. In the reply notice as well as rejoinder to the reply notice, respondent has taken a consistent stand that in the event of petitioner were to furnish the details of actuals payable to the Mumbai International Airport and furnish the documents like bills or receipts, same would be paid as per actuals. Undisputedly, said bills have not been furnished by the petitioner to the respondent-company. Even otherwise, respondent- company has disputed the debt and it has also contended that there was no unilateral ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
