Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 27 (1.12 seconds)
Bhadreshwar Vidyut Private Limited vs Godrej Industries Limited on 23 September, 2022 cites

Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd vs State Of Bihar And Ors on 8 October, 1999

6.3.1 In Hindustan Construction Company (supra) case the terms of the bank guarantee suggested that it was a guarantee against the mobilization advanced and could not be said to be unconditional. In the facts of the case the injunction against encashment was held to be justified. The court however in terms observed, as in the instant case also, that when the bank guarantee recites that the amount would be paid 'without demur' and irrespective of any dispute that might have cropped up, or might have been subsisting between the beneficiary on one hand and the person furnishing the bank guarantee, both the parties would bound by in terms of bank guarantee since it is an independent contract.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 245 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

Standard Chartered Bank vs Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. on 18 December, 2019

(para 8) 6.5 In Standard Chartered Bank Vs. Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited [(2020) 13 SCC 574], the Supreme Court analyzed various decisions, to propose the same dictum that "The dispute between the beneficiary and the party at whose instance the bank has given the guarantee is immaterial and is of no consequence. There are, however, exceptions to this Rule when there is a clear case of fraud, irretrievable injustice or special equities. The Court ordinarily should not interfere with the invocation or encashment of the bank guarantee so long as the invocation is in terms of the bank guarantee."
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 56 - I Malhotra - Full Document

Svenska Handelsbanken vs Indian Charge Chrome (Dayal, J.) on 15 October, 1993

6.2.1 In Svenska Handelsbanken Vs. Indian Charge Chrome [(1994) 1 SCC 502], the contention advanced was in respect of liquidated damages and it was submitted that the respondent had to prove liquidated damages quantified the same before invoking the guarantee. It was contended that the invocation of the bank guarantee relating to advance and liquidated damages was after the expiry of period. Saying that no case was made out relating to fraud or irretrievable injustice, the court held that the appellant would be able to claim relief before arbitration by way of damages or amount wrongly recovered and that the irretrievable injustice could not be said to exists. The Supreme Court stated, "...in case of confirmed bank guarantee/irrevocable letters of credit it cannot be interfered with unless there is fraud and irretrievable injustice involved in the case and fraud has to be as established fraud. There should be prima facie case of fraud and special equities in the form of preventing irretrievable injustice between the parties. Mere irretrievable injustice without prima facie case of established fraud is of no consequence in Page 33 of 43 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 26 20:54:21 IST 2022 C/FA/4066/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/09/2022 restraining the encashment of bank guarantee. Only in the event of fraud or irretrievable injustice the court would be entitled to interfere in a transaction involving a bank guarantee and under no other circumstances."
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 179 - Y Dayal - Full Document

M/S. Hindustan Steel Works ... vs M/S. Tarapore & Co. Madras on 17 January, 1989

6.4 The Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited Vs. Tarapor and Company [(1996) 5 Page 34 of 43 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 26 20:54:21 IST 2022 C/FA/4066/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 23/09/2022 SCC 34] and reiterated the above principles to observe further, "...in the absence of a plea relating to fraud, much less of a finding thereto, we find that the court could not have stated that the defence raised by the respondent Bank on the grounds set forth earlier is sufficient to hold that unconditional leave should be granted to defend the suit. In the arbitration proceedings that were pending it was certainly open to the parties concerned to adduce proper evidence and establish as to what are the liquidated damages that are payable and if any excess amount had been paid, the same would be recovered."
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 17 - Cited by 71 - S S Quadri - Full Document
1   2 3 Next