SOLVEX PROPERTIES & SERVICES PVT LTD Vs. MARCO POLO RESTAURANTS PVT LTD
LAWS(CAL)-2021-1-22
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on January 08,2021

Solvex Properties And Services Pvt Ltd Appellant
VERSUS
Marco Polo Restaurants Pvt Ltd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Debangsu Basak,J. - (1.)In a suit for recovery of money from the defendant, on the basis of a written contract, the plaintiff has sought for relief under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
(2.)Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiff has submitted that, the defendant was a lessee in respect of an immovable property. The lease of the defendant is governed by the lease agreement dated April 22, 2004 entered into between the lessors and the defendant. The lessors had terminated the lease of the defendant and filed a suit for recovery eviction. In the suit for eviction, the Court had passed an Order dated August 27, 2014 requiring the defendant to pay occupation charges month by month. He has submitted that, the defendant is in breach of such order.
(3.)Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiff has submitted that, the plaintiff herein is the service provider of the building. The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a service agreement dated April 22, 2004. He has drawn the attention of the Court to Clauses 1 to 10 of the service agreement and submitted that, the defendant is obliged to pay the rates, taxes and surcharges in respect of the immovable property concerned to the plaintiff. The plaintiff had paid the same to the lessors. It is the obligation of the defendant, on a true and proper construction of the service agreement dated April 22, 2004, that the defendant is required to pay the same to the plaintiff. The defendant has not been paying the same for a considerable period of time. A sum in excess of Rs. 1.90 crores has become due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff on such account. On investigation of the assets available to the defendant, the plaintiff has learnt that, the defendant has no tangible assets. There is only one bank account existing in favour of the defendant which does not contain adequate amount to cover the eventual decree that the defendant is likely to suffer in the instant suit.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.