The Delhi High Court had asked SoftBank-backed Oyo on July 7 to file a list of its unencumbered assets within two weeks.
The July 7 order was passed in a case filed against Oyo by hospitality company Anam Datsec, citing non-payment of dues for its Golden Sands property in Calangute, Goa, and seeking over Rs 8 crore in damages.
The contempt petition filed by Anam Datsec has been listed for August 20, when the matter will also be heard.
Oyo told ET it had submitted the information required to the court and there was no merit in the contempt petition.
According to the July 7 order, Oyo was supposed to submit an affidavit of its unencumbered assets along with its response to Anam Datsec and send a similar affidavit in a sealed cover to the registry.
“Oyo and its subsidiaries were supposed to send us the list of unencumbered assets along with their reply. We received the reply a few days ago, but the list was missing. When we reached out to them over emails, they went unanswered. So, we moved the petition in the court today,” said Akash Nangia, director of Anam Datsec and founder of startups Techjockey.com and SISL Infotech.
An Oyo spokesperson said in response to ET’s queries that the court did not issue any notice to the company or its directors after the contempt petition was filed on Monday.
“In compliance with the orders of the honourable court, Oyo has submitted all the required information in a sealed cover and therefore, there is no case of contempt against Oyo whatsoever,” the spokesperson added. Oyo informed the court that the dispute must be finally adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal as agreed by the two parties, the spokesperson said.
Advocate Sameer Rohatgi, who filed the contempt petition on behalf of Anam Datsec, said Agarwal has been named a party as founder and CEO of Oyo, along with other directors of the company.
“The people in charge of the company have to be roped in when you file a contempt. It is for them to appear before the court and respond,” Rohatgi added.
Anam Datsec has alleged in its case against the company that Oyo delayed and failed to pay the minimum guaranteed amount of Rs 14 lakh per month for the property, did not provide the necessary and accurate revenue statements and carried out sub-standard and hazardous construction on the property.
Anam Datsec had said previously that Oyo can’t hide behind the Covid-19 outbreak because the defaults were committed before the epidemic.
Besides non-payment of dues, it alleged that Oyo did not add seven rooms, an elevator and a swimming pool as agreed and did not furnish complete invoices against a payment of Rs 7.8 crore made by Anam Datsec for the additional construction.
In June, New Delhi-based Pearl Hospitality & Events had taken Oyo to court alleging non-payment of dues for exiting a property before expiry of the lock-in period.
Read More News on
Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily Market Updates & Live Business News.