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

1988 Supreme(Cal) 250

A.M.Bhattacharjee, A.K.Nayak
Asim Kumar Ganguli – Appellant
Versus
Indian Oxygen Limited – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Amal Krishna Saha, D.K.Pal, S.Roy, Sarnbhu Chakraborty, Sudhis Das Gupta

JUDGMENT

1. THIS is an appeal-by the plaintiff and is directed against the order dated 14. 8. 87, passed by the Second Assistant district Judge, Alipore in T. S. No. 37/87 of that Court, setting aside an order of injunction granted ex parte in favour of the appellant, restraining the respondent no. 1, Indian Oxyzen Company Ltd. from enforcing the bank guarantees furnished on behalf of the appellant in favour of the respondent company. The short question we are called upon to answer in this Misc. Appeal is whether in the ordinary course of business, Court should interfere by way of injunction to prevent the beneficiary of a bank guarantee from enforcing the same. We feel no hesitation to say and hold in the negative that courts should seldom do it, unless there is a serious dispute and a very good prima facie case of fraud and special equities in the form of preventing irretrievable injustice between the parties.

2. BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that the plaintiff as proprietor and. carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. West Bengal Wire Industries having its factory' at Kalyani, filed a suit against the respondent no. 1 company for recovery of Rs. 18,51,681. 98p. and for
















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