M/S Amit Metaliks Ltd v. Steel Authority Of India Ltd And ANR

16th May, 2024 (D/L No.14) (SKB) FMAT 181 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2024 M/s Amit Metaliks Ltd

Versus

Steel Authority of India Limited and another Mr. Kishor Datta, ld. A.G., Mr. Anirban Ray, ld. G.P., Mr. Pijush AGarwal, Ms. Shrivalli Kajaria, Mr. Debojyoti Das, Mr. Shayak Mitra ... for the appellant/applicant.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant.

2. Perused the order dated 14th May, 2024 which is impugned in this appeal. The appellant has filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. read with Section 151 thereof to restrain the respondent from invoking the bank guarantee.

3. On perusal of the impugned order, it shows that no caveat was lodged by the respondent and the learned court below simply refused the ad interim prayer sought for by the appellant on the ground that it would not be appropriate to pass any order in the suit without hearing the other side. The impugned order is laconic as it lacks reasoning and rationale.

4. The learned trial court should have weighed the case on merit and the ingredients for passing ad interim injunction without refusing the same by passing a laconic order. No doubt before passing the final order, both the parties should be heard at length and the ingredients of injunction should be discussed by the court at that stage at length.

5. Regard being had to the nature of the order passed, we direct the parties to maintain status quo ante as on 14th May, 2024, the date on which the impugned order was passed so far as the bank guarantee is concerned till final disposal of the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. read with Section 151 thereof.

6. We further direct the learned court below to expedite the process of hearing on issuance of notice to the other side and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible finally after hearing the parties at length, of course, by passing a reasoned order. It is needless to mention here that the order passed shall remain in force till the final order of the learned court below passed in the captioned application.

7. We having not discussed anything on merit regarding the claim and counterclaim of the parties, learned court below should not be

influenced by this order in any manner whatsoever and he is free to pass the final order in the captioned application in accordance with law.

8. With the aforesaid observation and in view of the nature of the order passed, we do not think it fit to issue notice to the other side. We have just asked the parties to maintain status quo to keep the balance even.

9. Accordingly, the impugned application along with the appeal are disposed of.

10.

The appellant is directed to comply with the provision of Order XXXIX Rule 3(a) and (b) C.P.C. 11.

Both the parties are directed to act on the server copy of this order.

(Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.) (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)