Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The respondent filed appearance and contested the contentions of the petitioner by refuting each and every allegation made in the petition inter alia stating Indo Alusys Industries Ltd V. India Bulls Construction Ltd. Page no. 2 of 17 that petitioner has not performed the contractual obligations which resulted in delay of the project which is evident from the trail of e­mails exchanged between the parties. The respondent submitted that the petitioner was not able to provide technical acceptable product / design to the respondent and the respondent being the sufferer on account of petitioner's failure to complete even sample flats of Tower F and Tower A in the project, had finally written an e­mail dated 02.12.2015 to the petitioner whereby terminated the said work order as per clause 20 (a) of work order on account of non adherence of technical acceptance, design / execution of work assigned. The respondent vide e­mail dated 02.12.2015 also requested to the petitioner to return the mobilization advance alongwith interest by 12.12.2015 failing which the same will be recovered by encashment of mobilization bank guarantee.