Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Supreme Court Extends Interim Protection on Bank Guarantees, Directs Expedited High Court Hearing

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant move, the Supreme Court of India has extended interim protection against the encashment of bank guarantees pertaining to the case involving Continental Engineering Corporation and Jaipur Metro Rail Corporation. The apex court’s order comes as a relief to the petitioner, who approached the Supreme Court after the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan delayed its decision on the matter.

In the proceedings held on November 20, 2023, the Supreme Court observed, “Since the statement which was made by the first respondent was to remain in operation only until 17 November 2023 and was not extended thereafter, the petitioner has moved this Court.” This observation was critical in understanding the urgency of the petitioner’s situation, where the imminent expiry of bank guarantees posed a significant financial risk.

The dispute revolves around performance and retention bank guarantees furnished by the petitioner to the first respondent. The invocation of these guarantees was contested in the High Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. However, a jurisdictional challenge based on the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, led to a postponement of the hearing, prompting the petitioner to seek relief from the Supreme Court.

In its order, the Supreme Court stated, “Both the parties have agreed to the above course of action and state that they will cooperate in the hearing of the application for the grant of injunctive relief.” This directive underlines the Court’s commitment to ensuring a fair and expedited hearing in the High Court.

Date of Decision: 20-11-2023

M/S. CONTINENTAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION VS JAIPUR METRO RAIL CORPORATION & ORS.     

Latest Legal News