Back
M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Lekh Raj Narinder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union Bank of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J. -
The Background facts
1. The petitioner No.1 is a partnership firm constituted on 26.04.1974 and re-constituted on 19.10.2012 with petitioner No.3 (As Karta of his HUF), his brother Devraj Miglani (As Karta of his HUF), and their sons as partners for carrying on business of rice mill at Ambala-Jind road, near Hindu High School, Kaithal.
2. The respondent No.2 is another partnership firm which was constituted 10.09.1985 and was re-constituted on 19.10.2012 with 5 partners including Ashok Kumar Miglani and Surinder Kumar Miglani, brothers of petitioner no.3 and Devraj Miglani to carry on business of another rice mill at Shergarh road, Kaithal.
3. The partners of both firms are descendents of Sh. Lekhraj Miglani and are thus related to each other.
The respondent No.1- Bank (for short 'the Bank') had granted CC limit facility of Rs. 30 Crores on 21.01.2013 to the respondent No.2.
4. On account of the close relationship between the partners of both firms, and since one of the properties given as collateral security ( a rice sheller unit situated at Shergarh road, Kaithal) was jointly held by petitioner No.3, Smt. Krishna Rani (the mother of petitioner No.4 w
The main legal point established in the judgment is the right of a guarantor to revoke a continuing guarantee under Sec. 130 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and the arbitrary and unreasonable actio....
fraud or misrepresentation against the 2nd respondent, the question of interfering in the present Writ Petition directing the respondents not to invoke the bank guarantees provided by the petitioner ....
A Bank Guarantee cannot be invoked after its expiration, as the obligation of the Bank to pay is strictly defined by the guarantee's terms.
A bank guarantee cannot be invoked after its expiration; claims must adhere to specified timeframes as per the terms of the guarantee.
It is true that jurisdiction of High Court under Art. 226 is an extraordinary jurisdiction vested in High Court not for purpose of declaring the private rights of the parties but for purpose of ensur....
Bank guarantees are independent and unconditional contracts, and courts should refrain from interfering with their invocation unless exceptional circumstances such as fraud or irretrievable injury ar....
Invocation of bank guarantees must adhere to existing court orders, and violations render such actions null and void.
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
