WALMARK HOLDINGS LIMITED vs FORTIS HEALTHCARE LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

$~O-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 21st January, 2026 CRL.M.A. 11201/2020 IN + O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 170/2019 WALMARK HOLDINGS LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: None versus FORTIS HEALTHCARE LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr. H.S. Chandhoke and Mr. Saleem Hasan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The captioned application has been filed on behalf of the respondent/ Fortis Healthcare Limited (hereinafter ‘Fortis’) under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CrPC’) read with Section 195 of CrPC and Sections 193, 196, 199, 200, 209 and 464 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’) on the ground that the petitioner/ Walmark Holdings Limited (hereinafter ‘Walmark’) and its officials have played serious fraud on this Court in an attempt to obtain favourable orders/ reliefs against Fortis. 2. The main petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘Act’) was filed on behalf Walmark against Fortis on Signature Not Verified Signed By:VIVEK O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 170/2019 Page 1 of 10 MISHRA Signing Date:21.01.2026 17:40:58 the basis of the draft Term Sheet dated 6th December 2017 (hereinafter ‘Term Sheet’) and the Side Letters dated 6th December 2017 (hereinafter ‘Side Letters’). RELEVANT FACTS 3. A non-binding Term Sheet dated 26th September 2017 (hereinafter ‘NBTS’) was executed between the parties. NBTS was valid for only 30 days and the same was not extended by the parties. Accordingly, NBTS stood lapsed. 4. Between 3rd December 2017 and 6th December 2017, the representatives of Fortis and Walmark prepared a draft Term Sheet. However, the said draft Term Sheet was never executed on behalf of Fortis. 5. Fortis, on 16th May 2018, received