1. At the behest of the Plaintiff – Larsen & Toubro Limited ( L & T), Defendant No. 1 -- Allahabad Bank has issued a Performance Bank Guarantee (‘PBG’) No. 00182131PG000017 on 11th July, 2013 for Rs. 98,35,00,000/- in favour of Defendant No.2 -- GVK Projects and Technical Services Limited (“GVK Projects”) which Guarantee is annexed and marked as Exhibit-A to the Plaint. GVK Projects by its letter dated 13th January, 2016 addressed to the Allahabad Bank invoked the said Guarantee dated 11th July, 2013. Pursuant thereto, the above Suit is filed by L & T for a declaration that the invocation of the said PBG by GVK Projects is per se illegal, unjustified, contrary to the contract, mala fide, fraudulent and therefore vitiated and not binding on L & T as also on Allahabad Bank, and that GVK Projects and Defendant No. 3 – GVK Ratle Hydro Electric Projects Pvt. Ltd. (“GVK Ratle”) are not entitled to receive any amounts thereunder from Allahabad Bank. L & T has also prayed for a permanent order and injunction restraining Allahabad Bank from making any payment under PBG and restraining GVK Projects and GVK Ratle from accepting any payment under the said PBG.

2. L & T has also taken out the above Notice of motion seeking a temporary injunction (i) against Allahabad Bank from making any payments to GVK Projects or to GVK Ratle under the said PBG and (ii) against GVK Projects and GVK Ratle from receiving any amounts under the said Guarantee.

3. An application for urgent ad-interim reliefs was made before this Court on 13th January, 2016, by L & T seeking to restrain Allahabad Bank from acting upon the invocation of the PBG which relief was granted upto 14th January, 2016. The same was extended from time to time and it was decided that after the parties file their respective affidavits i.e. affidavits-in-reply and the affidavit-in-rejoinder, if any, the Notice of Motion shall be heard finally.

4. However, GVK Projects and GVK Ratle has, in paragraphs 2 and 3 of its Affidavit-in-Reply, inter alia, submitted that in view of Clause 38 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) and further in view of Clause 1.6 of the Overall Agreement and Clause 5 of the GCC, this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the above Suit. In view thereof, the following issue is raised as a preliminary issue in the Suit under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.

“Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain and try the above suit?”

5. In view of the above, though the parties have filed their Affidavits upto the stage of Rejoinder, and a very detailed hearing is given to all the parties herein, it is decided, by consent of the parties, that the present hearing be treated as an ad-interim hearing, and the present order, an ad-interim order.

6. Briefly set out hereunder, are the facts leading to the filing of the above Suit by L & T:

6.1 GVK Development Projects Pvt. Ltd. was awarded the Letter of Intent on 31st May, 2010 (“the LOI”) by J & K State Power Development Corporation Limited (“JKSPDCL”) in respect of off-take of power from the 690 MW Hydro Electric Power Station located on the Chenab River, Drabshala Village, Kishtwar District of J & K on BOOT BASIS for a contract capacity of 424.03 MW generated from the installed capacity of 690 MW with the design energy of 2658.85 MW, pursuant to a tariff based International Competitive Bid Project (“the Project”).

6.2 GVK Development Projects Pvt. Ltd. incorporated GVK Ratle as a Special Purpose Vehicle for implementation of the Project and a Power Purchase Agreement dated 30th June, 2010 (“the PPA”) was executed between GVK Ratle and Power Development Department, Government of J & K (“the Procurer”).

6.3 GVK Ratle (“the owner”) awarded contract to GVK Projects (the “contractor”) for execution of civil and hydro mechanical works pertaining to the Project.

6.4 In furtherance thereof, GVK Proj