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

2000 Supreme(Del) 985

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
MMTC LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
SHYAM SINGH CHAUDHARY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.DUTT, ANURAG AGRAWAL, RAJIV NAYAR

Vikramajit Sen

( 1 ) THIS order will dispose of the defendant s application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff has already initiated arbitration for the recovery of its-dues from the Company (defendant No. 4 ). It has filed the present suit for recovery against the Guarantors as well as the company (defendant No. 4), predicating it on a Guarantee Bond.

( 2 ) IT is contended by learned Counsel for the defendants that, on 15. 9. 1995, two agreements were executed between the parties. The first is the "associateship Agreement", the significant contents of which are that the applicants/defendants had to submit personal bonds of the Promoter Directors in respect of the loan to be taken from the plaintiff (Clause 2) and that they had consented to arbitration (Clause 19 ). The second document executed on the same date was the Bond of Guarantee, the salient covenants of which are that in the event of a default in payment of the principal, interest and other monies due to the plaintiff, the Guarantors will pay the whole of the such amount (Clause 1); and that

















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