Dismissed

M/S. Oil & Natural Gas v. M/S. Oren Hydrocarbons Pvt.

Madras HC4 Sept 2018OSA/150/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal as infructuous following an arbitral award that declared the bank guarantee non-enforceable and directed its release. Consequently, the Court issued an interim direction to the bank to release the performance bank guarantee to the claimant within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Interim direction to the 2nd respondent to release the performance bank guarantee dated 08.03.2012 in favour of the appellant within two weeks.

M/S. Oil & Natural Gas Vs M/S. Oren Hydrocarbons Pvt. — Arbitration | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED:04.09.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

O.S.A.No.150 of 2016

¶6

and CMP.No.11003 of 2018

¶7

M/s.Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Thalamuthu Natarajan Buildings, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. .. Appellant/1^st Respondent Vs 1.M/s.Oren Hydrocarbons Pvt Ltd. Registered address: 28/2B, Saravana Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. ... 1^st Respondent/Appellant 2.ICICI Bank Ltd., 1^st Floor, 110, NH Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. .. 2^nd Respondents/2^nd Respondent

¶8

2.ICICI Bank Ltd., 1^st Floor, 110, NH Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.

¶9

Prayer:Original Side Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent read with Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Original Side Rules against the order and decreetal order passed by this Court dated 07.04.2016 made in O.A.No.1314 of 2015, Original Application praying that this Hon'ble court be pleased to grant an interim injunction restraining the respondents, their men, agents, or any one acting through or under men, from in any manner encashing the performance bank guarantee No.0009BG00115312 dated 08/03/2012, procured by the applicant and issued in favour of the 1^st respondent.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijayan for M/s.King and Patridge

¶11

For Respondents: Mr.Sathish Parasaran Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Parthasarathy

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

[Judgment of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]

¶15

The 1^st respondent in O.A.No.1314 of 2015 is the appellant.

¶16

The 1^st respondent herein filed O.A.No.1314 of 2015 under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying for an order of ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents herein their men, agents, or any one acting through or under them from in any manner encashing the Performance Bank Guarantee dated 08.03.2012, procured by the appellant/1^st respondent.

¶17

The learned Judge, vide impugned order dated 07.04.2016, while granting an order of ad-interim injunction restraining the 1^st respondent / appellant from invoking or encashing the performance bank guarantee, also directed the applicant / 1^st respondent to keep the bank guarantee alive by periodically renewing the same, during the pendency of the arbitral proceedings.

¶18

It is also brought to the knowledge of this Court that subsequently Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.V.Balasubramanian, Retired Judge was appointed as Sole Arbitrator and he entered upon reference and passed an award dated 02.05.2018, in and by which, the claimant / 1^st respondent, is entitled to a sum of Rs.14,02,575/- towards interest due on delayed payment and also to a sum of Rs.89,64,810.74/- towards shortfall in payment of invoices and further ordered that invocation of Performance Bank Guarantee dated 08.03.2012 by the respondent / appellant herein is not valid and legally enforceable and however, in the light of pendency of the present appeal, has granted liberty to them to approach this Court seeking direction for release of the Performance Bank Guarantee dated 08.03.2012.

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that remedy open to the appellant, if any, is to challenge the legality of the award.

¶20

Mr.Sathish Parasaran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent would submit that in the light of the observations made in Paragraph No.11, as well as Paragraph No.VII of the Award, this Court may pass appropriate orders for release of the Performance Bank Guarantee dated 08.03.2012.

¶21

This Court heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant also.

¶22

In the light of the said development, nothing remains for further adjudication in this original side appeal and therefore,

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

this Original Side Appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. In the light of the Paragraph No.111 and Clause VII Paragraph No.14 (Page No.64 of the Award), there shall be an interim direction directing the 2^nd respondent to release the Performance Bank Guarantee dated 08.03.2012 in favour of the 1^st respondent / claimant within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

¶25

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶26

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sk
TO:
The Sub Assistant Registrar,
Original Side,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.R.Parthasarathy, Advocates sr.no.60778
+1cc to M/s.King and Patridge, Advocate sr.no.61315
O.S.A.No.150 of 2016
ad(co)
nr 28/09/2018

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S. Oil & Natural Gas v. M/S. Oren Hydrocarbons Pvt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Oil & Natural Gas v. M/S. Oren Hydrocarbons Pvt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.M.H.Peeran Vs the Revenue Officer

Mr.B.Vivekananthan Vs B.Anandan

Haja Noordeen Sabhi @ Alhaj Vs The Adhoc Board of

M.Arumugam Vs the Commissioner

The Union of India Vs Appachi Gounder and Sons

The Principal Chief Vs S.Govindasami