It is further claimed that RSSB transferred the hospital to Fortis in a clandestine manner.ģ.3 It is stated that RSSB wrongfully invoked one of the bank guarantees furnished by GBPL on GBPL further claims that it submitted a bill for a sum of Rs. GBPL further claims that in July, 2012, a team from Fortis took over the work which was earlier being monitored by Project Management Committee (PMC). It is alleged that RSSB committed a breach of the agreements which resulted in delay in completion of the works. The FoC and the Agreement are hereafter collectively referred to as ‘the agreements’.ģ.2 GBPL claims that the work could not be completed in time on account of various reasons attributable to RSSB and Fortis. GBPL states that initially, the construction at Oncology Block was removed from the scope of works but subsequently, on, the parties entered into an agreement - captioned as “Form of Contract” (hereafter ‘FoC’) - for construction of the said block. RSSB awarded the work of a 200 bedded hospital at village Mundian Kalan, Ludhiana to GBPL on turnkey basis, by a letter of intent dated Subsequently, the parties entered into the agreement dated (hereafter ‘the Agreement’) for construction of the hospital. RSSB is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Briefly stated, the relevant facts necessary to address the controversy in this petition are as under:-ģ.1 GBPL is a private company and is, inter alia, engaged in the business of civil construction. RSSB has also opposed the present petition on the plea that this court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present petition as the construction works were executed in Ludhiana and the agreement dated expressly provided that the courts at Ludhiana would have the exclusive jurisdiction regarding the subject agreement.ģ. RSSB claims that the effect of this MoU is that the agreements in question stood discharged by novation. GBPL had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter ‘MoU’) dated with Fortis Hospitals Limited (hereafter ‘Fortis’), which is stated to be the assignee of RSSB. The respondent (hereafter ‘RSSB’) disputes the existence of an arbitration clause as it claims that the agreements in question stand discharged and the arbitration clause contained therein has also perished. Vibhu Bakhru, J.:- The petitioner (hereafter ‘GBPL’) has filed the present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter ‘the Act’) praying that an arbitrator be appointed to decide the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent in relation to the agreements dated and entered into between the parties.Ģ.
0 kommentar(er)
