M/S. Engineering Projects (India) Limited v. Mr.S.Krishnamoorthy, Proprietor,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) FRIDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JULY 2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR in O.P. No.83 of 2021 In the matter of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and In the matter of disputes and differences between M/s. Sriram Engineering Company and Engineering Projects Limited in respect of the Work order no.
SRO/PMD/686/044 dated 19.06.2013 in Chennai near Perumbakkam PhaseII Reach-II Package- 2D ... Petitioner -VersusM/s. Engineering Projects India Limited
92, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai- 600 017.
... Respondent M/s. Engineering Projects (India) Limited 92, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai- 600 017.
... Applicant/Respondent -VS- ... Respondent/Petitioner Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to modify its Order passed in O.P.No.83 of 2021 dated 29.03.2021 and direct the Respondent/Petitioner to keep the Performance Bank Guarantees alive until the disposal of the Conciliation/Arbitration Proceedings. This Application coming on this day before this court for hearing in the presence of Mr. P.J. Rishikesh, advocate for the applicant herein and M/s. Jayasree, advocate for the respondent herein and upon reading the Judge's summons and the common affidavit of D. Nithiyanandhan filed
herein and the order dated 29/03/2021 made in O.P. No.83 of 2021 and the court made the following order:- While passing an order on 29.03.2021, this Court directed that till the disposal of the Conciliation proceedings, the performance bank guarantee shall not be invoked by the respondent.
2. Now the contention of the respondent is that, after passing separate order, the bank guarantee was allowed to be expired on 24.06.2021. In such view of the matter, it is the contention of the respondent that the bank guarantee has to be kept alive. Whereas the respondent in the present application contented that, due to pandemic, his account was declared as Non Performing Asset (NPA). Therefore, the bank guarantee could not be renewed, however, they would renew the bank guarantee within a period of eight weeks. The respondent's submission is recorded. Counter is also filed in this case.
3. In such view of the matter, the respondent is directed to renew the bank guarantee with a period of eight (8) weeks. In the meanwhile, the parties should cooperate for the conciliation proceedings and arrive at a settlement.
4. If the bank guarantee is not renewed within a period of eight(8) weeks, it is open to the applicant to encash the bank guarantee.
5. With the above observations, this application is closed. WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2021.
Sd./- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (O.S.II) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
VF-15/07/2021 in O.P. No.83 of 2021
ORDER
DATED: 02.07.2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR FOR APPROVAL: 26/07/2021 APPROVED ON : 27/07/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) FRIDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JULY 2021 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR in O.P. No.83 of 2021 In the matter of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and In the matter of disputes and differences between M/s. Sriram Engineering Company and Engineering Projects Limited in respect of the Work order no.
SRO/PMD/686/044 dated 19.06.2013 in Chennai near Perumbakkam PhaseII Reach-II Package- 2D ... Petitioner -VersusM/s. Engineering Projects India Limited 92, G.N.Chetty Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai- 600 017.
... Respondent M/s. Engineering Projects (India) Limited 92, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai- 600 017.
... Applicant/Respondent -VS- ... Respondent/Petitioner Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to modify its Order passed in O.P.No.83 of 2021 dated 29.03.2021 and direct the Respondent/Petitioner to keep the Performance Bank Guarantees alive until the disposal of the Conciliation/Arbitration Proceedings. This Application coming on this day before this court for hearing, the court made the following order:- While passing an order on 29.03.2021, this Court directed that till the disposal of the Conciliation proceedings, the performance bank guarantee
shall not be invoked by the respondent.
2. Now the contention of the respondent is that, after passing separate order, the bank guarantee was allowed to be expired on 24.06.2021. In such view of the matter, it is the contention of the respondent that the bank guarantee has to be kept alive. Whereas the respondent in the present application contented that, due to pandemic, his account was declared as Non Performing Asset (NPA). Therefore, the bank guarantee could not be renewed, however, they would renew the bank guarantee within a period of eight weeks. The respondent's submission is recorded. Counter is also filed in this case.
3. In such view of the matter, the respondent is directed to renew the bank guarantee with a period of eight (8) weeks. In the meanwhile, the parties should cooperate for the conciliation proceedings and arrive at a settlement.
4. If the bank guarantee is not renewed within a period of eight(8) weeks, it is open to the applicant to encash the bank guarantee.
5. With the above observations, this application is closed. Sd./-N.S.K.J.
02/7/2021 //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.