LAWS(BOM)-1990-8-30

SURESH ARJUNDAS BAKHTIANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On August 29, 1990
SURESH ARJUNDAS BAKHTIANI Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed this petition for an interim injunction seeking to restrain the last respondent, their officers, servants, representatives and agents from encashing the bank guarantee bond No. 1-10 dated 23-1-1990 for Rs. 1,00,000/- issued by Vijaya Bank, Thane, pending disposal of the petitioners application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 numbered, as Arbitration Suit No. 2644 of 1990. The Vijaya Bank is not impleaded as a party to the main petition or to this petition for interim relief, presumably because the said bank is not a party in the arbitration agreement relied upon by the petitioners. The petitioner has invoked section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 in support of this petition for interim relief. I have heard counsel appearing in this petition as well as companion petitions i. e. Arbitration Petition Nos. 156 of 1990 and 135 of 1990 at some length. Having regard to the well settled principles of law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court and the ration of the judgment of the Division Bench of High Court of Calcutta in the case of (Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited v. Keneilhouse Angami) reported in 68 Company Cases 361 which is on all fours and for the reasons set out in subsequent paragraphs of this order, I hold that this petition is not at all maintainable under section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.

(2.) SOME of the material facts concerning this petition are as under :-

(3.) AN exactly identical question arose before the High Court of Calcutta in the case of Hindustan Paper Corporation Limited v. Keneilhouse Angami reported in 68 Company Cases 361. In that case the learned Single Judge had directed that disputes between the parties be referred to arbitration and such direction included adjudication of arbitration in respect of the right of the beneficiary against the bank arising out of the bank guarantee although the bank was not a party to the arbitration clause. It was held by the Honourable Division Bench of High Court of Calcutta in that case after referring to earlier judgments of the High Court of Calcutta and certain other judgments as under :