NOIDA office through its authorised signatory intimating about the grant of aforesaid contract through letter of acceptance dated 1.10.2009 accepting their tender dated 4.9.2009. Subsequently ... company and giving details of the contract expressed desire to sublet the contract by intimating that the money received from DSIIDC would be transferred
complaint filed against him with regard to giving the
shop on sub-contract to Rajiv Kumar son of Shishpal during the period ... allegations and stated that neither he gave the shop on
contract nor sublet the same to said Rajiv Kumar; a copy of the
complaint
crores. Aforesaid Shamsher Singh
told the complainant that he wanted to sublet the contract. Thereafter,
Shamsher Singh along with Vikas Kumar, Sunil Kumar and Gaurav
witness further submitted that the contractor who had been
awarded work contract cannot sublet the same to another contractor
parties in a separate bilateral contract.
Nothing presented before us suggests that S IPC OT’s contract with the
Appellant provided for “back to back ... payment claims raised by contractors. That
subletting was provided for by the main contract, and indeed occurred, has
been found by the Arbitrator (in both
mining lease for any right, title or interest therein is assigned,
15
sublet, mortgaged or in any other manner transferred. The
requirement of prior consent ... title or interest
therein, or
(b) Enter into or make any arrangement, contract or
understanding whereby the lessee will or may be directly or
indirectly financed
performing any of the terms and conditions of the
Contract or in payment of any money payable to GATI
(India) Limited. We shall on first ... breach of clause 37.1 of the contract
by the petitioner and that clause 37 prohibits subletting of works
directly or indirectly to any person, firm
appellant under the said lease deed was permitted to sublet the
premises and had sublet the premises to the respondent no.6 NBCC under ... plaintiffs had a privity of contract with the
appellant alone even if they permitted the appellant to sublet the premises.
The appellant as a tenant
parties in a separate bilateral contract. Nothing presented before us suggests
that S IPC OT’s contract with the Appellant provided for “back to back ... payment
claims raised by contractors. That subletting was provided for by the main contract,
and indeed occurred, has been found by the Arbitrator (in both
nomination from Puducherry Govt. It is submitted that Government work/contract cannot be sublet by the nominated contractors. But knowing fully well about this fact
