Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Zilingo Pte. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on bank guarantee and mask supply contract. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's argument on delivery and testing issues. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis on urgency and directions regarding bank guarantee. (Para 7) |
| 4. court's order for next steps in the case. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been held through video conferencing.
2. The present writ petition has been listed in the typed supplementary list on special marking and has been taken up at 4:00 P.M today. The urgency expressed is that a bank guarantee, for a sum of USD 6.75 million, is sought to be encashed by the Respondent No. 1/Union of India, through the Ministry of External Affairs. The encashment demand has been raised by the High Commission of India in Singapore, for invoking the said bank guarantee dated 9th April 2020, vide its letter dated 8th October, 2020. The issuing bank, of the bank guarantee, is Respondent No. 3/DBS Bank Singapore, has sent an e-mail to the Petitioner, stating that the amount is likely to be credited to the beneficiary's account by 10:00 A.M on 15th October, 2020.
3. The brief background of this matter is that a contract was ente
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
