LAWS(GJH)-1992-4-22

VIJAYSINH AMARSINH AND CO Vs. HINDUSTAN ZINC LIMITED

Decided On April 03, 1992
VIJAYSINH AMARSINH AND CORPORATION,JAMNAGAR Appellant
V/S
HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD. UDAIPUR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against an order below Exh. 6 in Special Civil Suit No. 104 of 1988 passed by the Second Jt. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jamnagar on 12/03/1992.

(2.) The appellant is the original plaintiff, who was given a contract by Hindustan Zinc Limited, first respondent (Ori. Defendant No. 1) for construction of 'Besunda Dam' situated in Udaipur District of Rajasthan State after inviting tenders from general public. The plaintiff's tender was accepted and the contract was entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 1. The contract was for Rs. 2.49 crores. As per the condition of contract, 10% of the tender amount was agreed to be given by way of Bank guarantee and accordingly the plaintiff gave Bank guarantee of Rs. 25 lacs on 17/03/1987 of the defendant No. 2-Bank. It is the case of the plaintiff that the contract was in the two parts and the work was to be completed in two stages. So far as the first stage was concerned, it was a substantial one; while the second stage was only of Rs. 30 lacs. It is his case that he has completed first stage of the contract to the satisfaction of the first respondent. However, so far as the second stage is concerned, even though the plaintiff was ready and willing to do that work, it was not given to him and therefore, he could not do that work. He was constrained to revoke the work of the second stage of the contract by a notice dt. 8/08/1988. The plaintiff also contended that since contract of stage II was not given to him, an agreement for that part of the contract was without any consideration and, therefore, void. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from encashing and/or invoking the Bank guarantee given to defendant No. 1 by defendant No. 2-Bank. Alongwith the plaint, he filed an application Exh. 6 for interim injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from invoking Bank guarantee during the pendency of the suit. It appears that initially ad-interim relief was granted by the trial Court which was continued from time to time. Finally, however, after hearing the parties by the impugned order dt. 12/03/1992 application Exh. 6 came to be dismissed and the order of status quo which was granted by the Court earlier came to be vacated.

(3.) It is against this order that the present Appeal From Order is filed by the original plaintiff.