DURHA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED NEW DELHI REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE K MADHAVA GOWDA Vs. BATEMAN ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED BANGALORE REP BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IA No.2 filed by the defendant-petitioner herein under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act') seeking to refer the parties for arbitration, having been dismissed vide order dated 04.08.2011 passed by the learned XXVI Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.27279/2009. Plaintiff-respondent herein has filed the said suit seeking a judgment and decree against the defendant-petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.10,88,10,521.96 along with interest at 15% with effect from 21.12.2008. The suit is based on a contract entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant as per the letter of intent dated 18.12.2006 whereunder the defendant is stated to have agreed and undertaken to execute and complete certain civil, structural steel and architectural work in accordance with the specifications and drawings prepared and approved by the plaintiff in respect of a project.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, the defendant agreed to complete the execution of the work to the extent of atleast 80% within 61/2 months from the date of issuance of letter of intent and the balance work was extendable to a maximum period of nine months from the date of letter of intent. Failure to complete the work within the stipulated period entailed payment of a sum equal to 1% of contract value per week or part thereof beyond the schedule period of completion subject to a ceiling of 10% contract value towards damages. It was alleged by the plaintiff that despite the plaintiff honouring its payment obligations, defendant failed to perform its responsibilities and although defendant was called upon to submit reconciliation statement and supporting documents for measurement and ascertainment of the final billing, defendant failed to respond. Allegations are made in the plaint stating that defendant had either managed to fabricate final completion certificate or obtain the same through wrongful means and that the defendant had resorted to fabrication of documents to support its bogus claim to the detriment of the plaintiffs interests.