Madras High Court
M/S.Turbo Engineers(Cbe) vs The Canara Bank(Sme Branch) on 28 November, 2018
Author: Pushpa Sathyanarayana
Bench: Pushpa Sathyanarayana
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.11.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA.J.,
W.P.SR.No.128824 of 2018
M/s.TURBO Engineers(CBE),
rep. by its General Manager Arun Kumar,
266/1, Thennampalayam-Annur Road,
Ponnandampalayam, Arasur P.O.,
Coimbatore-641 659 .. Petitioner
Vs
1. The Canara Bank(SME Branch),
rep. by its Chief Manager,
No.27, 1st Floor, Jawans Bhavan, TB Road,
Coimbatore-641 018.
2.M/s. Hamtek Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.,
rep. by its Managing director,
H.No.8-2-293/82/F/B-23, Road No.8, Film Nagar,
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500 096. ...Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the first
respondent from releasing the payment against the Bank Guarantee for
Rs.28,99,998/- executed by the petitioner vide L95GOPG170470001
dated 16.02.2017 in favour of the second respondent.
For Petitioner : M/s.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
ORDER
This petition has been listed under the caption "for maintainability".
2. This writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to forbear the first respondent from releasing the payment against the Bank Guarantee for Rs.28,99,998/- executed by the petitioner vide L95GOPG170470001 dated 16.02.2017 in favour of the second respondent.
3. The said Bank guarantee is being invoked based on the purchase order placed by the second respondent on 18.01.2017. The Bank guarantee is executed by the petitioner in favour of the second respondent on 16.02.2017. Now, the petitioner, challenging the communication dated 13.11.2018 sent by the second respondent to invoke the Bank Guarantee in the event of the petitioner not extending the same on or before 30.11.2018. Seeking a direction to the first respondent not to release payment, the petitioner is before this Court.
4.Whether the cancellation of contract is proper or not and whether the invocation of the Bank Guarantee is correct or not, are not http://www.judis.nic.in 3 within the purview of enquiry under Article 226 of the Constitution of India especially, when the dispute relates to a contract between the Bank and the petitioner. If there is a written demand for invoking the Bank guarantee pursuant to the breach of contract, the same can be invoked. Therefore, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not intended to facilitate the avoidance of obligation voluntarily breached by the petitioner.
5. Hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable and therefore, the same is rejected at the SR stage itself.
28.11.2018
Index : No
Internet : Yes
dn
To
1. The Canara Bank(SME Branch),
rep. by its Chief Manager,
No.27, 1st Floor, Jawans Bhavan, TB Road, Coimbatore-641 018.
2.M/s. Hamtek Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Managing director, H.No.8-2-293/82/F/B-23, Road No.8, Film Nagar, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500 096.
http://www.judis.nic.in 4 PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA.J., dn W.P.SR.No.128824 of 2018 28.11.2018 http://www.judis.nic.in