cites: 1634294

U.P. State Sugar Corporation vs M/S. Sumac International Ltd on 4 December, 1996

13. So far as the second exception is concerned, this court in U.P. State Sugar Corporation Vs. Sumac International Ltd. [(1997) 1 SCC as considered herein earlier, at para 14 on page 575 observed as follows :

Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 385 - S V Manohar - Full Document

Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd vs Coal Tar Refining Company on 7 August, 2007

(vi) of the Apex Court judgment in the case of Himadri Chemicals Industries Limited v. Coal Tar Refining Co., cited supra. In respect of the conditional bank guarantee, unless the condition is satisfied, the bank guarantee cannot be invoked and also further, other factors like non-payment as well as belated complaint, cannot be disregarded. They all are well interconnected with one another. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially taking into consideration of the following factors, viz.,

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 256 - T Chatterjee - Full Document

U.P. Co-Operative Federation Ltd vs Singh Consultants & Engineers (P) Ltd on 19 November, 1987

In fact, on the question of fraud, this decision approved the observations made by this court in the case of U.P. Coop. Federation Ltd Vs. Singh Consultants and Engineers (P) Ltd. [(1988) 1 SCC 174].

Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 469 - G L Oza - Full Document

Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 19233

Section 11 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section Cites 0 - Cited by 14391

Vinitec Electronics Private Limited vs Hcl Infosystems Limited on 2 November, 2007

In (2008) 1 SCC 544 (Vinitec Electronics Private Ltd. v. HCL Infosystems Ltd.), the Supreme Court considered the scope of invoking the bank guarantee and under which circumstance, the bank guarantee can be invoked. It has been held in paragraphs-11, 12, 13 and 14 of the above judgment as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 170 - B S Reddy - Full Document

M/S Bses Ltd. (Now Reliance Energy Ltd.) vs M/S Fenner India Ltd. & Anr on 3 February, 2006

12. It is equally well settled in law that bank guarantee is an independent contract between bank and the beneficiary thereof. The bank is always obliged to honour its guarantee as long as it is an unconditional and irrevocable one. The dispute between the beneficiary and the party at whose instance the bank has given the guarantee is immaterial and of no consequence.In BSES Limited (Now Reliance Energy Ltd.) vs. Fenner India Ltd. Andanr. this court held:

Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 149 - Full Document

U.P. State Sugar Corporation vs M/S. Sumac International Ltd on 4 December, 1996

Himadri Chemicals Industries Ltd vs Coal Tar Refining Company on 7 August, 2007

U.P. Co-Operative Federation Ltd vs Singh Consultants & Engineers (P) Ltd on 19 November, 1987

Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]

Section 11 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]

Vinitec Electronics Private Limited vs Hcl Infosystems Limited on 2 November, 2007

M/S Bses Ltd. (Now Reliance Energy Ltd.) vs M/S Fenner India Ltd. & Anr on 3 February, 2006

The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996

Indian Companies Act, 1913

Mahatma Gandhi Sahakra Sakkare ... vs National Heavy Engg. Coop. Ltd. And Anr on 11 July, 2007

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results

Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]

Section 11 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]