CHL LTD Vs. ALITALIA AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a suit for recovery of Rs.3918606.37. The plaintiff company is running a Hotel named "Crowne Plaza Hotel" at New Friends Colony, New Delhi. It is alleged that the defendant approached the plaintiff in the year 2006 for providing accommodation along with other services to its Passenger Crew and Cargo Crew. An agreement was executed between the parties on 18.09.2006. The agreement was valid from the period from 01.10.2006 to 30.09.2008. Under the agreement, the plaintiff bank was required to set aside 20 to 31 rooms throughout the year, 10/11 rooms per day for "Passenger Crew" checking-in and 10/11 rooms per day for "Passenger Crew" late checking- out(overlap) and 9 rooms for Cargo Crew back to back for the year. The room rent was fixed at Rs.7.000 per double room (single use) plus taxes for the period 01.10.2006 to 30.09.2007. The rate for the period from 01.10.2007 to 30.09.2008 was to be mutually agreed not later than 30.06.2007 and the maximum increase could have been 15%. Rs.3,000 including taxes per room per night were agreed for the overlap.

(2.) THE agreement dated 18.09.2006 was extended by Integration of Agreement signed on 18.09.2007 wherein new rates were agreed from the period 0.10.2007 to 30.09.2008. THEse were, Cargo Crew Rs.8,050 per room per night plus taxes Passenger Crew Rs.8,050 room per night plus taxes and Overlap Crew Rs.3,450 per room per day inclusive of taxes. THEreafter, for the period from 01.10.2008 to 30.09.2009, the rates were fixed at Rs.9500/- plus tax for single occupancy and Rs.10500 plus 13.13% for double occupancy along with breakfast charges of Rs.500/- plus tax for each person.

(3.) EX.PW-1/2 & EX.PW-1/2A are the agreements where the tariff was fixed. The unpaid bills pertain to the period 11.08.2008 to 10.01.2009. EX.PW-1/2A shows that the tariff agreed between the parties was Rs.8050/- per room per night for cargo crew and passenger crew and Rs.3450/- per day including taxes for the overlap, upto 30.09.2008. For the period subsequent to 30.09.2008, there is no written agreement between the parties agreeing to a particular tariff. It however, appears from EX.PW-1/3 that the plaintiff company was demanding tariff of Rs.9,500/- but the defendant wanted some reduction in the proposed tariff. The invoices raised by the plaintiff company on the defendant from time to time are collectively as EX.PW-1/4.