This is a two-line order dismissing original applications as infructuous because the respondents had already invoked the bank guarantee. It decides nothing of general application.
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.
O.A.Nos.291 and 292 of 2024
Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,
Mrs.Anisha Chandrakumar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the prayer sought in both the Original Applications has become infructuous, since, the respondents 1 and 2 have already invoked the bank guarantee against the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid submission, both the Original Applications are dismissed as infructuous.
17.04.2024
sd
1/1
Krishnan Ramasamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
