Grounds 6.3 and 6.4

  6.3. That Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have willingly disregarded the sanctity of the terms of the Agreement dated. 10.12.2020 by not taking permission of a disputed land from the concerned authority which ultimately fell under the forest land. Even the permission for the said disputed land was not taken for 1 year, Petitioner even completed the boring and base work, subsequently on 13.12.2021, permission was granted after the lapse of 1 year. Contract term was of 8 months (excluding the rainy season), the work to be completed by October, 2021, but because of the deficiency on the part of the Respondent No.1, 2&3 , the work never was started. In 2022 prices of all material like sand, cement & steel were escalated, petitioner requested respondent No.2 to change the price of the contract but respondent No.2 only made a false assurance. On 18.01.2023, Petitioner received letter of termination reasoning that the work was not completed on time, which can clearly be interpreted that the entire work was on the default and deficiency on the part of respondent No.1, 2 & 3.

6.4.That in letter dated 18.01.2023 and in letter dated. 10.03.2023 the Respondent No.2 and 3 has alleged that the Petitioner has not been able to complete the project in breach of the terms of tender agreement. It is submitted that, the Respondents have fabricated and narrated an untrue scenario in the letter of termination with mala fide intention to secure the liquidation of the Bank Guarantee. It is pertinent to mention that the Petitioner was compelled to stop the work because the said work was not approved by the concerned forest authority for which respondent No.2 & 3 are responsible, the said permission was received after the lapse 1 year from the date of execution of the contract and liquidating the bank guarantee due to delaying in completion of the project is highly illegal and fraudulent on part of the concerned respondents. Therefore, the statement of the Respondent No.2 and 3 that the Petitioner has left the project incomplete is in breach of contract agreement and prima facie untrue and thus fraudulent.