SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Bom) 338

D.R.DHANUKA
Suresh Arjundas Bakhtiani – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and another – Respondent


JUDGMENT - D.R. DHANUKA, J.:---The petitioner has filed this petition for an interim injunction seeking to restrain the last respondent, their officers, servants, representatives and agents from encashing the bank guarantee bond No. 1-10 dated 23-1-1990 for Rs. 1,00,000/- issued by Vijaya Bank, Thane, pending disposal of the petitioner's application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 numbered, as Arbitration Suit No. 2644 of 1990. The Vijaya Bank is not impleaded as a party to the main petition or to this petition for interim relief, presumably because the said bank is not a party in the arbitration agreement relied upon by the petitioners. The petitioner has invoked section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 in support of this petition for interim relief. I have heard counsel appearing in this petition as well as companion petitions i.e. Arbitration Petition Nos. 156 of 1990 and 135 of 1990 at some length. Having regard to the well settled principles of law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court and the ration of the judgment of the Division Bench of High Court of Calcutta in the case of (Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited v. Keneilhouse Angami)1, reported in 68 Compan




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top