TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (6) TMI 940
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 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 petitioner a minimum monthly guarantee amounts of Rs. 2,25,000/- and Rs. 1,75,000/- respectively. It is contended that within a short period of commencement of its operations respondent began to default on several of the payment obligations and on 05.07.2010 respondent unilaterally abandoned both the premises obtained by it and willfully committed breach of said agreements. It is contended that by such breach committed by respondent, petitioner has suffered harm, prejudice and injury both to their reputation and business operations. 3. Petitioner further contends that outstanding amount payable by the respondent to the petitioner is Rs. 41,50,167/- and this was duly intimated to the respondent company. Petitioner further contends that on 07.04.2011 petitioner informed the respondent about the revised due amount namely by reducing 40% of the petitioner's ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Rs. 41,50,167/- which was an unreasonable demand and a meeting was held between the parties whereunder it was agreed to by the respondent that it is liable to pay to the petitioner the rents payable for first six months since one year lock-in-period was there and at the rate stated in the agreement and for balance six months of rents including incidentals such as water charges, electricity bills etc., on actuals shall be payable at the rates agreed to between the petitioner and Mumbai 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 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hand defence of the respondent is that petitioner had assured all business potential and high source of revenue yield in respect of the premises and respondent was unable to generate even minimum guarantee amounts payable to petitioner and even after running the operation of the said food chain/kiosks for few months it was found that it is not a revenue yielding venture and as such respondent has intimated the petitioner via e-mail dated 02.07.2010 to the following effect and it reads as under: "Keeping in mind the last few communications we have had we are shutting down operations with effect from 2nd July 5 P.M at both the locations i.e., Domestic Terminal 1A and International Arrival terminal, since we haven't been able to resolve the issues. As per your dead line we have sent the reconciled statement from our side-but haven't got a response from you. We are removing all the perishables & the signage from the premises. Please let us know the final reconciliation & dues payable so that we can amicably vacate the premises with out equipments". 9. Though petitioner has contended in the petition at paragraph 12 that there is unilateral abandonment of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osks was Rs. 4,00,000/- and Security Deposit with the petitioner would cover the claim of petitioner 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 abandonment or termination and petitioner was fully aware of the contract having been put to end way back in July 2010 itself, which is also admitted by the petitioner-company in its reply to the email vide its reply dated 02.07.2010 vide in Annexure-R1 and as such defence of the respondent cannot be brushed aside as frivolous. In that view of th....