Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6 The respondent company was incorporated in the year 1993. It owns property at No.20 (Old Door No.9-C & 9-D), Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai 4. This property is built up and comprises 9 floors including two basements with 132 rooms and with the areas for setting up facilities such as restaurants, swimming pool, gymnasiums, banquet and conference hall and related facilities for hotel to be established in these premises.

7 The respondent also obtained permission from the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority for construction of multi-storied structure for setting up of a hotel in the property. It also sought the collaboration of the applicant for setting up a star hotel at the property and after discussions, the applicant and the respondent entered into a binding Term Sheet on 17.6.2011 and a Consultancy Agreement for technical services on 30.6.2011 at Chennai.

23 The application is opposed by the respondent by filing counter, wherein the stand of the respondent is, that for the services provided by the applicant under the "Binding Term Sheet", they were to be paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) and on completion of the construction and development of the hotel, the respondent was to hand over the hotel in a fully completed state to the applicant under the Hotel Operation agreement for 10 years.

24 Clause 11 of the Term Sheet provided that the parties shall enter into the following agreement;

29 Under the Consultancy agreement, the applicant appointed two personnel including General Manager who informed the respondent that the new Hotel will carry the name "RE:GEN:TA" and not "Royal Orchid" and also showed the design and logo for the new name.

30 The General Manager, however was evasive and refused to disclose the reason. The respondent subsequently came to know that Bangalore based Kamat Hotels group had filed a Trademark infringement suit against the applicant and there was an order of injunction against the applicant from using the name "Orchid". The case of the respondent is that this fact was suppressed by the applicant, at the time of entering into binding Term Sheet or signing of the other two agreements. When confronted about this and after discussion with Mr.Mubarak Ali, the applicant agreed to terminate the agreements so far signed by them, and accordingly, the applicant withdrew its personnel from the post. The General Manager opted for alternative job. The respondent has denied the receipt of letter dated 26.6.2012.