U.P. State Sugar Corporation vs M/S. Sumac International Ltd on 4 December, 1996
In U.P. State Sugar Corporation (supra), the
Supreme Court explained in para 12 as under:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.19 seconds)Vinitec Electronics Private Limited vs Hcl Infosystems Limited on 2 November, 2007
Recently in Vinitec Electronics Private Ltd. (supra) the
above legal position was reiterated. It was explained that with the bank
guarantees being unconditional and irrevocable, the bank was bound to
honour it and pay the amounts "at once upon receipt of written demand
O.MP. No. 322 of 2013 Page 7 of 10
of the Respondent." The Court rejected the plea of fraud in that case as
being vague and indefinite and not satisfying the requirement of law.
Even the plea of irretrievable injustice was "again vague and not
supported by any evidence."
U.P. Co-Operative Federation Ltd vs Singh Consultants & Engineers (P) Ltd on 19 November, 1987
In the case of U.P. Co-
operative Federation Ltd. v. Singh Consultants and
Engineers (P.) Ltd. (1998) 1 SCC 174 which was the
O.MP. No. 322 of 2013 Page 6 of 10
case of a works contract where the performance
guarantee given under the contract was sought to be
invoked, this Court, after referring extensively to
English and Indian cases on the subject, said that the
guarantee must be honoured in accordance with its
terms. The bank which gives the guarantee is not
concerned in the least with the relations between the
supplier and the customer; nor with the question
whether the supplier has performed his contractual
obligation or not, nor with the question whether the
supplier is in default or not. The bank must pay
according to the tenor of its guarantee on demand
without proof or condition. There are only two
exceptions to this rule. The first exception is a case
when there is a clear fraud of which the bank has
notice. The fraud must be of an egregious nature such
as to vitiate the entire underlying transaction."
Svenska Handelsbanken vs Indian Charge Chrome (Dayal, J.) on 15 October, 1993
In Svenska Handelsbanken v. Indian Charge Chrome
AIR 1994 SC 626 it was stressed by the Supreme Court as under:
Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
1