CENTURION BANK LIMITED Vs. LERSEN AND TUBRO LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocates

(2.) These four petitions preferred under article 227 of the Constitution of India arise from the orders refusing to grant leave to defend and the decree passed against the defendant in Special Summary Suits No. 429 of 2001; 430 of 2001; 431 of 2001 and 432 of 2001 respectively. All the four suits arose between the same parties in similar set of facts. The learned advocates agree that these petitions be heard for final disposal. Since all the petitions raise identical question, these petitions are disposed off by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, facts are recorded as stated in Special Summary Suit No. 429/2001 alone.

(3.) The plaintiff in the aforesaid suits is Larsen & Tubro Limited, a Public Limited Company thereinafter referred to as, "the Plaintiff ". The defendant, is the Centurion Bank Limited thereinafter referred to as, "the Defendant". The plaintiff and one Messrs. KND Engineering Technologies Limited thereinafter referred to as, "M/s. KND Limited" had entered into a contract for supply of 'Equipment' for construction works site, Digbai, Assam State, In accordance with the terms and conditions of the said contract, the plaintiff had made advance payment in the sum of Rs.44, 31,159=00 in respect of 3% of the cost of the Equipment. M/s. KND Limited had furnished security by way of Bank Guarantee in favour of the plaintiff for the like amount. By letter dated 12th March, 2001 the plaintiff invoked the said Bank Guarantee. On refusal of the defendant to pay the amount agreed under the Bank Guarantee, the plaintiff took out the summons for judgment under Order 37 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. In the said Summons for Judgement, the defendant moved application for leave to defend under Order 37 Rule 3 CPC. The defendant also moved application Ex.13 under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to implead M/s. KND Limited as party defendant to the suit. Both the said applications were contested by the plaintiff. By impugned Orders dated 19th January, 2004, both the said Applications came to be rejected. Decree in the suit amount with interest @ 6%. per annum from the date of the -suit till realization came to be passed in each suit against the defendant. Feeling aggrieved, the defendant has preferred the present petitions.