Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Bank Guarantees Must Be Honored Free From Interference by Courts: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, comprising the Acting Chief Justice and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Mini Pushkarna, has underscored the sanctity of bank guarantees in commercial dealings. The Court made this observation while deciding the appeal in FAO(OS) (COMM) 296/2022, involving OFB Tech Private Limited and M/S KKSPUN India Ltd. and Ors.

The appellant, OFB Tech Private Limited, had challenged the earlier judgment of a Single Judge, which restrained them from invoking and encashing bank guarantees provided by the respondent, KKSPUN India Ltd. The case revolved around disputes arising from the performance of various contracts related to the manufacture and supply of different products.

In its detailed judgment, the Court clarified the legal position on bank guarantees, stating, "Commitments of banks must be honoured free from interference by the courts. Otherwise, trust in commerce internal and international would be irreparably damaged." This observation emphasizes the autonomy and independence of bank guarantees in commercial transactions.

The Court further noted, "In order to restrain the operation either of irrevocable letter of credit or of confirmed letter of credit or of bank guarantee, there should be serious dispute and there should be good prima facie case of fraud and special equities in the form of preventing irretrievable injustice between the parties."

Addressing the specific contentions of the case, the Bench held that no prima facie case of fraud or irretrievable injustice was established by the respondent, thereby warranting no restraint on the invocation of the bank guarantees. The Court allowed the appeal, stating that the banks are bound to honor the guarantees as per their terms, as they are unconditional and unequivocal.

Date of Decision: 01 February, 2024

OFB TECH PRIVATE LIMITED VS M/S KKSPUN INDIA LTD AND ORS.

 

Latest Legal News