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

1998 Supreme(Guj) 592

Y.B.BHATT
PREM CONDUCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.H.CHHATRAPATI, MIHIR J.THAKOR, SANJAY A.MEHTA

Y. B. BHATT, J.

( 1 ) ). Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant (original plaintiff) and learned Counsel for the second opponent (original defendant No. 2 ). Hearing defendant No. 1 at this stage is not necessary since it has not taken any stand, either way, during the hearing of the injunction application.

( 2 ) ). As a result of the hearing and discussion, I am of the opinion that the ad interim relief granted by me by order dated 5/11/1998 requires to be confirmed. It is accordingly confirmed, subject to the further conditions that the appellant-plaintiff shall file an undertaking in the trial Court within two weeks from today to the effect that (i) in case the appellant-plaintiff loses in the suit, it shall immediately deposit in the trial Court a sum equivalent to 17% interest on Rs. 15. 00 lacs from the date of invocation of the bank guarantees by the second defendant upto the date of the decree, (ii) that it shall not oppose any application made by the second defendant for withdrawal of the same, and that (iii) such deposit shall be made before the exercise of the right of appeal from the decree in question. There shall be no extension of the said period.

( 3 ) ). The tr












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