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

1991 Supreme(Del) 684

Y.K.SABHARWAL
SIMAX CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN JAITLEY, P.M.KAPUR, VINAY BHASIN

Y. K. SABHARWAL

( 1 ) IN the suit plaintiff has sought a decree declaring that two letters dated 3rd July 1991 issued by defendant No. 2 invoking the bank guarantees mentioned in the said letters are illegal, inoperative and void. Plaintiff has also sought a decree for permanent injunction against defendant No. 1 State Bank of India from making payment to defendant No. 2 of Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 4,38,000. 00 being the amounts of the two bank guarantees. The plaintiff has further prayed that defendant No. 2 shall be restrained from receiving the said amounts from defendant No. 1. By this application filed under 0. 39, Rr. 1 and 2 read with S. 151, Civil Procedure Code plaintiff prays that pending the decision of the suit defendant No. 1 be restrained from making payments and defendant No. 2 be restrained from receiving the said payments of the said bank guarantees. Briefly, the facts pleaded in the plaint are as under:

( 2 ) THE plaintiff is a private limited com- pany engaged in the construction of civil works. Defendant No. 2 by notice advertised for pre-qualification of bidders for construc- tion of a complex at Bikaner. The bid of the plaintiff being the lowest was accepted. Communi













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