The High Court of Delhi dismissed the appeal as infructuous because the respondent bank had already released the disputed bank guarantees, rendering the interim directions moot.
The appeal was disposed of as infructuous because the bank guarantees had already been released.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~37
M/S POWER MAX (INDIA) PVT LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr. Manish Kr. Srivastava and Mr. Rijul Taneja, Advocates.
Versus
M/S JINDAL URBAN WASTE MANAGEMENT (GUNTUR) LTD & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr. Manoj K. Singh and Mr. Vijay K. Singh, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Rajiv R. Mishra and Ms. Suruchi Yadav, Advocates for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
O R D E R % 11.02.2020
FAO(OS) (COMM) 33/2020
Page 1 of 2
HIMA KOHLI, J
ASHA MENON, J
FEBRUARY 11, 2020 NA
Page 2 of 2
FAO(OS) (COMM) 33/2020
M/S POWER MAX (INDIA) PVT LTD
M/S JINDAL URBAN WASTE MANAGEMENT (GUNTUR) LTD
Anr.
Hima Kohli
Asha Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
