1. The order dated 21st August 2013 on the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S. No.26084/2012 is assailed in this Miscellaneous First Appeal. By the impugned order, the Court below has rejected the application filed by the plaintiff/appellant herein for injunction restraining the 1st defendant/1st respondent herein from making any payments under the Letters of Credit bearing Nos.7030012I0000003, 7030012IM0000004, 7030012- IM0000040 and 7030012IM0000041 issued on 2.1.2012, 2.1.2012, 22.3.2012 and 27.3.2012 in favour of the 2nd respondent herein and restraining 2nd defendant/2nd respondent from realizing said amounts.

2. O.S. No.26084/2012 is filed by the appellant herein for declaration that the aforementioned Letters of Credit issued by the 1st defendant -bank in favour of the 2nd defendant are liable to be cancelled on account of fraud played by the 2nd defendant; Mandatory injunction is sought for payment of damages assessed at Rs.12,50,000/-tentatively; Perpetual Injunction is also sought restraining the 1st defendant from paying any amount under the aforementioned Letters of Credit to the 2nd defendant or any person claiming through or under the 2nd defendant. In the said suit, an application came to be filed for Temporary Injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC restraining the defendant No.1 from making any payment and consequently restraining the defendant No.2 from realizing the payment under the aforementioned Letters of Credit.

3. It is the case of the plaintiff that it is in the business of manufacturing and exporting of finished leather and leather garments; on various occasions, the plaintiff has imported raw animal skins in various categories from the 2nd defendant for manufacture of finished leather and leather goods and had done business of more than 2 million US dollars with the 2nd respondent on Letters of Credit opened in favour of the 2nd defendant; raw animal skins supplied by the 2nd defendant in favour of the plaintiff in the month of October-2011 were of inferior quality and consequently the plaintiff has suffered severe problems in the finished products; e.mails were sent by the plaintiff on 29.10.2011 and 10.1.2012 to the 2nd defendant highlighting the defect; on the assurance of the 2nd defendant that no future complaints would arise, the plaintiff placed orders in respect of several varieties of sheep skin, goat skin and cow skin/hides; Accordingly, the 2nd defendant sent proforma invoices dated 19.12.2011, 7.2.2012 and 9.2.2012 for the requirement of the plaintiff's specification such as Sawakini Sheep skins W/B, Goat skins W/B, Arabic Sheep skins of different grades etc. As per the agreement, the plaintiff opened the Letter of Credit with the 1st defendant bank in the name of the 2nd defendant and issued instructions to the 2nd defendant to land the consignment at Chennai Port for further delivery of the consignment of goods to their factory at Ambur, Tamilnadu; As per the proforma invoices, the 2nd defendant raised invoices on various dates as also the bill of lading; the plaintiff approached their banker with a request to open an import letter of credits and the bill of lading against the consignment of goods pertaining to certain invoices; the plaintiff received consignment of goods at Chennai port on 9.3.2012 and 23.3.2012 respectively through a sealed container; the containers were subjected to inspection by qualified Surveyor; after verification of the consignment of goods of Sawakini Sheep skins randomly, it was found that skin sizes of certain varieties were smaller than the required sizes and they were defective; the Surveyor found that there was damage of 30% of the goods in each container; after going through the process of dyeing, it was found that the goods were unshaped, thin, tanning fault etc., Accordingly, the Surveyor opined that there was around 20% of loss on the dyed crust seen under the damaged condition. Inspite of repeated req