Prabhatam Advertisement Pvt. Ltd vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation on 13 February, 2019

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Prabhatam Advertisement Pvt. Ltd vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation on 13 February, 2019

Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani

$~30
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+    W.P.(C) No. 1475/2019
     PRABHATAM ADVERTISEMENT PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner
                      Through: Mr. Sunil Choudhary, Adv.
                      versus
     SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent
                      Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with
                               Mr.Sandeep Bajaj, Mr. Govind
                               Kumar & Mr. Naman Tandon, Advs.
                               for SDMC.

    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
                    ORDER

% 13.02.2019 CM APPL. No. 6799/2019 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) No. 1475/2019 & CM APPL. No. 6798/2019 The petitioner impugns order dated 29.01.2019 issued by respondent/SDMC blacklisting the petitioner from its panel of advertisers who may bid for license from SDMC for a period of three years. A perusal of order dated 29.01.2019 indicates that, as per respondent/SDMC, the petitioner owes a sum of Rs. 44,25,514/- which is overdue under a contract for display of advertisements at the parking of B K Dutt Market, Rajouri Garden (West Zone).

The relevant portion of order dated 29.01.2019 records as under:

"The aforesaid facts and gestures of M/S Prabhatam Advertising Pvt. Ltd. are considered malpractice, against the fair business practices and as breach of trust hence this department is constrained to blacklist M/S Prabhatam Advertising Pvt. Ltd. from the panel of Advertisers in SDMC for a period of three years."

Issue notice.

Learned counsel for respondent/SDMC appears on advance copy and accepts notice.

Mr. Sanjay Poddar, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent/SDMC states that the petitioner has committed several defaults; that there has also been an earlier round of litigation between the parties by way of W.P. (C) No. 8234/2015; and that in fact a civil suit seeking recovery of all monetary claims against the petitioner has been filed by the respondent in the aggregate sum of Rs. 2.70 crore which is pending before the original side of this court, apart from an arbitration claim filed by the petitioner against the respondent which is also pending.

Be that as it may, Mr. Sanjay Poddar contends that the respondent's right of recovery by way of civil suit is in addition to its right to blacklist the petitioner in accordance with the respondent's policy and the guidelines laid down by various judgments, which guidelines the respondent says it has complied with.

Let counter-affidavit be filed within four weeks; rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within three weeks of receiving the counter-affidavit.

Re-list on 16th May 2019.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

FEBRUARY 13, 2019/uj

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders