VIBHU BAKHRU
Kuber Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Doosan Power Systems India Pvt Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHU BAKHRU, J.
IA Nos. 6495/2021, IA 6496/2021
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 158/2021
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 9(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the ‘A&C Act’), inter alia, praying as under:-
ii) Direct the Respondent not to encash the HDFC bank cheque bearing No. 000209 amounting to Rs. 1,18,75,000/- till further orders;
iii) Restrain the Respondent from taking any coercive steps against the Petitioner in relation to the Contract dated 27.12.2017.”
3. Mr Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has, essentially, stressed on two reliefs. First, that this Court should restrain the invocation of the bank guarantee in question (Performance Bank Guarantee No. 003GT02180720033 of Rs.1,18,75,000 - hereinafter ‘the Bank Guarantee’); and second, that the respondent be directed not to encash the cheque furnished by the petitioner (Cheque bearing No. 000209 amounting to Rs.1,18,75,000/-) till further orders.
4. On 2
Svenska Handelsbanken v. M/s. Indian Charge Chrome and Others: (1994) 1 SCC 502
BSES Ltd. V. Fenner India Ltd.
U.P. State Sugar Corpn. v. Sumac International Ltd.
Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd. V. Tarapore & Co. and Anr.
U.P. Coop. Federation Ltd. v. Singh Consultants and Engineers (P) Ltd. (1988) 1 SCC 174
Svenska Handelsbanken v. Indian Charge Chrome (1994) 1 SCC 502
UP State Sugar Corporation v. Sumac International Ltd.: 1997 (1) SCC 568
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.