A.S. Chandurkar, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) CHALLENGE in the present appeal is to the order dated 24 -11 -2014 passed by the trial Court partly allowing the application for injunction moved by the present respondent No. 1. The facts in brief are that a tender notice came to be issued by the present appellant on 2 -6 -2012 in respect of two jobs. The respondent No. 1 submitted its bid and on 27 -11 -2012, work order was issued to the respondent No. 1. The work in question was to be completed within 21 months between the period from 6 -10 -2012 to 5 -7 -2014. According to the respondent No. 1, there were various hurdles while executing aforesaid work and hence said work could not be completed within stipulated time. A legal notice came to be issued on 12 -9 -2014, but there was no response from the present appellant. Ultimately, in August, 2014, respondent No. 1 filed suit in which prayer was made for awarding compensation of Rs. 4,01,74,706/ -. Another relief sought was with regard to return of machineries, equipments and vehicles as well as damages to the tune of Rs. 2 Crores.
(3.) AFTER filing of the suit, the present appellant on 7 -10 -2014, invoked the bank guarantees that were furnished by the respondent No. 1 and thereafter on 9 -10 -2014, appellant gave a notice of termination of contract to the respondent No. 1. As per said notice, besides terminating the work, penalty came to be imposed and respondent No. 1 was also debarred from participating in future tenders in individual capacity as well as by forming joint venture. The respondent No. 1, therefore, amended the suit and challenged the notice of termination dated 9 -10 -2014. An application for interim injunction was also moved by the respondent No. 1 in which it was prayed that present appellant be restrained from acting on the notice of termination.;