|

Hindustan Steel Workers Construction Ltd. v. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd.

Hindustan Steel Workers Construction (HS)[1] Ltd. v. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engineers) Pvt. Ltd. (GS)[2] 1995 SCC (6) 76 (Unconditional Bank Guarantee, Performance Guarantee) FACTS   HS and GS entered into contracts whereby GS was to construct 11 schools. The United Commercial Bank, Calcutta (Bank) gave two Bank Guarantees (BG1 &2) to HS on behalf…

|

Ramchandra B. Loyalka v. Shapurji N. Bhownagree

Ramchandra B. Loyalka v. Shapurji N. Bhownagree  (1940) 42 BOMLR 550 (Section 124, 126 and 145 of Indian Contract Act, Difference between Indemnity and Guarantee) FACTS: The plaintiff (P) was a sub-broker employed by the defendant broker (D) on 50% commission. P introduced 6 constituents and became answerable to the broker for them. The constituents…

|

National Highways Authority of India v. Ganga Enterprises and Anr.

National Highways Authority of India v. Ganga Enterprises and Anr. AIR 2003 SC 3823 (on demand performance guarantee) FACTS: Appellant (N) issued a tender notice for collection of toll on a part of a highway. For this purpose two types of securities were to be furnished, bank guarantee and performance security by way of a…

|

Amrit Lal Goverdhan Lalan v. State Bank of Travancore and Ors.

Amrit Lal Goverdhan Lalan v. State Bank of Travancore and Ors. 1968 SCR (3) 724 (ss.133, 135, 139 and 141 of Indian Contract Act, Suretyship, Subrogation) FACTS: Respondents 3 to 6, as partners of Respondent 2 firm (R2), entered into an agreement with a Bank (R1) to open a cash credit account to the extent…

|

Punjab National Bank Ltd. v. Bikram Cotton Mills and Anr.

Punjab National Bank Ltd. v. Bikram Cotton Mills & Anr. 1970 AIR 1973 (Difference between indemnity and guarantee) FACTS The first respondent company (R1) opened a cash-credit account with the appellant bank (A) and to secure repayment of the balance due at the foot of the account R1 executed three documents through its managing agents…

|

Jay Bharat Credit v. Commissioner of Sales-Tax and Anr.

Jay Bharat Credit v. Commissioner of Sales-Tax and Anr. (2000) 7 SCC 165 FACTS: The appellants (A) had a business of hire-purchase. They engaged in purchasing of vehicles and then giving them on hire with the hirer paying an initial amount and then paying the rest, which includes the price of the vehicle and hire charges,…