Disposed

Sakrobotix Lab Pvt. Ltd., v. Govt of India

Orissa HC6 Oct 2020WP(C)/12801/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an inter-application regarding a startup centre lease, the court directed the applicant to pay outstanding fees from April 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 before shifting the centre. Upon compliance, the applicant shall be allowed to shift forthwith, subject to the terms of the agreement.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay fees per agreement from April 1, 2020 to Dec 31, 2020 before shifting; shift allowed forthwith upon payment.

Sakrobotix Lab Pvt. Ltd., Vs Govt of India — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) NO. 12801 OF 2020

¶2

I.A. No. 12762 of 2020

¶3

07 11.12.2020 Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶4

Heard Mr. Debaraj Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned Asst. Solicitor General appearing for the opp. parties.

¶5

This application has been filed by the petitioner to modify the order dated 06.10.2020 to the extent of deleting the line subject to condition that “he makes payment of admitted dues in respect of its Startup Centre” for the interest of justice. It is further prayed that the opp. party no.2 should be directed not to prevent the petitioner to shift the Startup Centre by the end of December, 2020.

¶6

Mr. Parhi, learned Asst. Solicitor General for the opp. parties vehemently objected to the same and submitted that the petitioner has not yet paid the admitted dues. Hence, the opp. party no. 2 is not in a position to allow the petitioner to shift its Startup Centre. He refers to the agreement dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure6), which was executed between the parties to operate the Startup Centre. Clause-B(5) of the Terms and Conditions of the agreement reads as follows:

¶7

“B. Space and Other Facilities:

¶8

xxx xxx xxx

¶9

5.The space fee for unfurnished space is @ 40 Rs. Per sq. ft. per month and that for one cubicle is @ 2,500 Rs. Per month. The additional maintenance charges of Rs.500 for each cubical and @ Rs.5 per

¶10

¶11

sq. ft. per month for unfurnished space for security, gardening, cleaning, and water. The space fee will be enhanced by 10% if the startup gets one or more extensions.”

¶12

Mr. Parhi, learned Asst. Solicitor General, therefore, submits that the petitioner before shifting its Startup Centre is liable to pay the fee in terms of the aforesaid clause, as directed by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2020. He further submits that an amount of Rs.1,75,394/- is outstanding against the petitioner as on 12.10.2020 and he is liable to pay, at least, that amount before shifting of its Startup Centre.

¶13

Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently objecting the same submits that the petitioner has already cleared the rent as per Clause-B(5) of the agreement up to 31^st March, 2020. Since then, the petitioner has not been allowed to operate the Startup Centre. Thus, the petitioner is not liable to pay any amount for the same.

¶14

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the petitioner shall pay the fee as per Clause-B(5) of the agreement under Annexure-6 from 1^st April, 2020 till the end of December, 2020 before shifting its Startup Centre. If such payment is made, the petitioner shall be allowed to shift its Startup Centre forthwith.

¶15

The I.A. is accordingly disposed of by modifying the order dated 06.10.2020 to the aforesaid extent.

¶16

¶17

Authenticated copy of this order downloaded from the website of this Court shall be treated at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed in this Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.

¶18

.................................

¶19

K.R. Mohapatra, J.

¶20

bks

Sakrobotix Lab Pvt. Ltd., v. Govt of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakrobotix Lab Pvt. Ltd., v. Govt of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Debananda Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Kumar Mohanty Vs Susmita Ray

Premalata Barik Vs the Union of India

Manoj Kumar Purahitta Vs Member Board of Revenue

Sk.Tamarulla Vs State of Odisha

Kartikeswar Tudu Vs State of Odisha