Delhi High Court - Orders
Bls Infrastructure Ltd vs Rajwant Singh & Ors on 3 November, 2023
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CS(COMM) 466/2020 with IA 9748/2020
BLS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.
..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr.Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Advocate
with Mr.B.S.Srivastava, Advocate.
versus
RAJWANT SINGH & ORS.
..... Defendant
Through: Ms.Anjali Dhingra, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ORDER
% 03.11.2023
1. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues are framed:-
(i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of Rs.71.92 Lakhs as the share of amount of work done payable by DSIIDC to the defendant? OPP.
(ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claimed interest @ 18% p.a. from 01.01.2013 till the date of filing of the suit amounting to Rs.99,24,960/-? OPP.
(iii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of Rs.60,94,618/- being the money paid by the plaintiff towards renewal charges of the Performance Bank Guarantee of Rs.1,95,55,725/- to Indian Overseas Bank, Defence Colony, New Delhi? OPP.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/11/2023 at 01:05:22
(iv) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of Rs.41.75 lakhs being the earnest money deposited on behalf of the defendant in favour of Executive Engineer (CD-X12), DSIIDC Account of Summer Corporation Sumer Corporation Ltd.? OPP.
(v) Whether the defendants are liable to substitute their own FDR for a sum of Rs.30 lakhs as margin money towards the Performance Bank Guarantee of Rs.1.95 Crores in Overseas Bank, Defence Colony, New Delhi? OPP.
(vi) Whether the defendants are liable to get the Performance Bank Guarantee of Rs.1,95,55,725/- in favour of the DSIIDC from Indian Overseas Bank, Defence Colony substituted by its own bank guarantee? OPP.
(vii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP
(viii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to be permitted under Order II Rule 2 CPC for claiming the amount of the performance guarantee submitted by it with the DSSIDC from the defendants? OPP
(ix) Whether the agreement dated 04.05.2010 is not enforceable being insuffficiently stamped? OPD
(x) Whether the suit is not maintainable as the plaint is not signed, verified and instituted by the duly authorized person? OPD
(xi) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is barred under Order II Rule 2 and 3 CPC? OPD.
(xii) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is bad for non-joinder of parties? OPD.
(xiii) Relief.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/11/2023 at 01:05:22
2. No other issue arises or pressed.
3. The parties to file their list of witnesses within 15 days. The plaintiff to file an affidavit by way of examination-in-chief within four weeks.
4. List before the learned Joint Registrar for recording of evidence on 06.02.2024.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J NOVEMBER 3, 2023/akb This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/11/2023 at 01:05:23