Parsvnath: Fees charged are ‘reasonable’ - Indian Real Estate Forum

fritolay_ps · 09-07-11

Chandigarh: Attributing “mala fide” to Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB) for “deliberately delaying” the proceedings of arbitration pending before the Arbitration Tribunal, Parsvnath Developers Limited today filed its reply in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Terming the fee being charged by the Tribunal, comprising three retired Judges, as “very reasonable” and “not exorbitant”, the company has opposed a petition filed by Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB).

Terming the fees being charged by the arbitrators for resolving the dispute pertaining to the multi-crore mega project Prideasia between Parsvnath and CHB as “very high and limitless”, the CHB had moved the High Court. Taking stock of its contentions, a division bench headed by Justice Hemant Gupta had stayed the proceedings pending before the Tribunal comprising three arbitrators, all retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges.

Calling the petition filed by CHB as an “after thought”, the company filed a strongly worded reply in the High Court stating that aim of CHB is to delay the proceedings pending before the Tribunal. The company has strongly opposed the petition terming the grounds taken by CHB as “highly unpalatable” and “grossly misconceived”.

Parsvnath in its reply has submitted, “A perusal of proceedings of the Tribunal reveals that it has actively encouraged expeditious disposal of the proceedings, but due to mala fide conduct of the petitioner (CHB), the Tribunal was not able to proceed expeditiously.”

Justifying the fees being charged by the Tribunal, the company submitted that, “...fees are very reasonable especially considering the quantum of work involved as well as the quantum of claims and counter claims filed by the parties before the said Tribunal. The fees is not only fair and reasonable but the same is not even a third of the fee charged by various Tribunals of repute.”

The company further submitted, “In a case where the claims of parties are to the tune of Rs 4,600 crores, the fee fixed is very reasonable. Having themselves delayed the proceedings, it is most inappropriate for the petitioner to now lay the blame for the same on the Tribunal.”

Appearing on behalf of CHB, Advocate Sanjay Kaushal on the last date of hearing, in May, had contended that till now the CHB has paid over Rs 80 lakh to the three arbitrators. He had submitted that Rs 26 lakh each had already been paid to the three arbitrators namely Chief Justice of India (Retd) G B Patnaik; Justice D P Wadhwa, a retired Supreme Court Judge and Justice Amar Dutt, retired Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge.

The CHB had taken the plea that it had requested the Tribunal to reduce the fees of the three arbitrators from Rs 1.50 lakh each to Rs 25,000. The request was declined by the Tribunal on May 2.

Aggrieved, the CHB had moved the High Court against the order dated May 2 and also demanded that the order of the Tribunal demanding payment of the remaining amount and also advance payment shall be stayed.

-The Financial Express

09-07-11	#1
fritolay_ps Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Latitude 28.587, Longitude 77.394 Posts: 8,551 My Mood: Thanks: 197 Thanked 671 Times in 487 Posts	Parsvnath: Fees charged are ‘reasonable’ Chandigarh: Attributing “mala fide” to Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB) for “deliberately delaying” the proceedings of arbitration pending before the Arbitration Tribunal, Parsvnath Developers Limited today filed its reply in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Terming the fee being charged by the Tribunal, comprising three retired Judges, as “very reasonable” and “not exorbitant”, the company has opposed a petition filed by Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB). Terming the fees being charged by the arbitrators for resolving the dispute pertaining to the multi-crore mega project Prideasia between Parsvnath and CHB as “very high and limitless”, the CHB had moved the High Court. Taking stock of its contentions, a division bench headed by Justice Hemant Gupta had stayed the proceedings pending before the Tribunal comprising three arbitrators, all retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges. Calling the petition filed by CHB as an “after thought”, the company filed a strongly worded reply in the High Court stating that aim of CHB is to delay the proceedings pending before the Tribunal. The company has strongly opposed the petition terming the grounds taken by CHB as “highly unpalatable” and “grossly misconceived”. Parsvnath in its reply has submitted, “A perusal of proceedings of the Tribunal reveals that it has actively encouraged expeditious disposal of the proceedings, but due to mala fide conduct of the petitioner (CHB), the Tribunal was not able to proceed expeditiously.” Justifying the fees being charged by the Tribunal, the company submitted that, “...fees are very reasonable especially considering the quantum of work involved as well as the quantum of claims and counter claims filed by the parties before the said Tribunal. The fees is not only fair and reasonable but the same is not even a third of the fee charged by various Tribunals of repute.” The company further submitted, “In a case where the claims of parties are to the tune of Rs 4,600 crores, the fee fixed is very reasonable. Having themselves delayed the proceedings, it is most inappropriate for the petitioner to now lay the blame for the same on the Tribunal.” Appearing on behalf of CHB, Advocate Sanjay Kaushal on the last date of hearing, in May, had contended that till now the CHB has paid over Rs 80 lakh to the three arbitrators. He had submitted that Rs 26 lakh each had already been paid to the three arbitrators namely Chief Justice of India (Retd) G B Patnaik; Justice D P Wadhwa, a retired Supreme Court Judge and Justice Amar Dutt, retired Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge. The CHB had taken the plea that it had requested the Tribunal to reduce the fees of the three arbitrators from Rs 1.50 lakh each to Rs 25,000. The request was declined by the Tribunal on May 2. Aggrieved, the CHB had moved the High Court against the order dated May 2 and also demanded that the order of the Tribunal demanding payment of the remaining amount and also advance payment shall be stayed. -The Financial Express

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
VAT/ Service tax charged by builders?	Manoj0309	Mumbai	3	01-06-10 07:52 PM
Whay parking is charged separately?	rsatitkar	Pune	7	03-05-10 04:43 PM
Parsvnath launches Parsvnath Palacia at Greater Noida	AbhishekGupta	Parsvnath	0	30-04-07 01:53 PM
Parsvnath Performs Bhoomipujan for Parsvnath City	Happy	Parsvnath	0	17-04-07 12:34 PM
Parsvnath launches Parsvnath City in Dharuhera, Haryana	Happy	Parsvnath	1	23-03-07 10:15 AM