Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

45. ..

46. Any structural defects in the Building, including the LAND-OWNERS CONSTRUCTED AREA shall be repaid by LG at their cost and expense upto a period of one year from the Handover Date.

...

52. All disputes, differences, claims and questions whatsoever which may arise during the continuance of this Agreement between the parties hereto touching these presents or the construction, meaning, effect or application thereof or any Clause or thing contained in this Agreement or in respect of any account or as to any http://www.judis.nic.in act of omission of either party or as to any other matter in any way relating to or arising out of or touching this Agreement or the rights, duties and liabilities of either party under this Agreement shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory modifications or enactment thereof for the time being in force, each party nominating an arbitrator of the ranking of a retired High Court Judge residing at Chennai. The two arbitrators so appointed shall confer and nominate an umpire. The arbitration proceedings shall be held at Chennai and courts in Chennai alone shall have the jurisdiction.

(p) According to the first respondent-Company, Clause 46 of the JDA provides that they shall rectify the structural defects, if any, in the building. The first respondent-Company shall be obliged to do so for a period of one year from the date of handing over of the possession. It is evident from the said Clause that completion of the building and handing over of the possession of the completed building, was clearly understood to be different from structural defects. The first respondent-Company had specifically undertaken to set right the defects, if any and being the owner of 50% share in the property, the first respondent-Company is equally interested in protecting and maintaining the property in the best possible state and condition. According to the first respondent-Company, as a direct consequence of the appellants' failure to refund the first respondent-Company's security deposit and on their failing to pay the expenses incurred with respect to statutory charges, the first respondent- Company suffered severe loss.