AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Sinha, J
I.A. No.34 of 2022
Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant and was heard on 25th April, 2022, when he had moved the petition. Inter alia, following was said in the order made.
“1. Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant and submits, impugned is order/judgment dated 18th April, 2022, by which the Court below did not admit his client’s petition for interim measure made under section 9 in Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. He submits, it is a fact the contract was terminated on 13th December, 2018. However, the Court below did not appreciate that by, inter alia, letter dated 23rd March, 2022 the oil company had requested his client to extend the bank guarantee till 30th August, 2022 as the claim period is up to that date, to avoid encashment of the bank guarantee.
It appears from said letter dated 23rd March, 2022, the bank guarantee stood expired on 30th August, 2021.”
Today he moves interim application in I.A. no.34 of 2022 to demonstrate that it is possible for a bank guarantee to have claim period beyond its validity. He then refers to page-39 in the writ petition. It is letter dated 28th August, 2020 issued by the bank, in which it is stated that amended expiry date of the bank guarantee is 30th August, 2021 and claim expiry date is 30th August, 2022. He submits further, upon termination of the contract on 13th December, 2018, the oil company cannot insist upon extension of the bank guarantee. His client has not put in requisites as yet and there be extension of time for it to do so.
Requisites be put in by Monday (9th May, 2022). Thereupon issue notice in terms order dated 25th April, 2022.
List on 19th May, 2022 awaiting service return.
………………………..