Back
SUPREME COURT
, , , JJ
Hindustan Steelwork Construction Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Tarapore and Co. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of appeals regarding bank guarantees. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. legal challenges surrounding the injunction against encashment. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. judicial principles regarding bank guarantees and encashment rights. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. clarification of permissible court interferences. (Para 13 , 14 , 19) |
| 5. final ruling on the appeals and enforcement of bank guarantees. (Para 15 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
1. These two appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment and order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Civil Revision Petitions Nos. 3865 and 3866 of 1989. The High Court allowed the revision petitions, set aside the common order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Visakha patnam in O.P. Nos. 455 and 457 of 1988 and passed an order of injunction restraining Hindustan Steelwork Construction Ltd. (the appellant and for short referred to as HSCL) from encashing the bank guarantees given by Bank of India in its favour at the instance of M/s. Tarapore and Co. (Respondent No.1 and hereinafter referred to as the contractor).
3. In between 30-1-84 and 8-12-87, Bank of India gave 14 guarantees in favour of HSCL at the instance of the cont
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
