Responsibility of guarantor




Responsibility of guarantor
 


2024 C L C 1514

[Islamabad]

Before Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, J

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY---Appellant

Versus

Messrs KAC-UCC JV and others---Respondents

F.A.O. No.141 of 2023, decided on 2nd May, 2024.

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---

----Ss.42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Suit for declaration and injunction---Interim injunction, refusal of---Performance guarantee---Encashment---Principle---Respondent / plaintiff was aggrieved of encashing of Performance Guarantee issued on its behalf in favour of appellant / defendant---Trial Court allowed interim injunction restraining encashment of Performance Guarantee furnished on behalf of respondent / plaintiff by insurance company---Validity---Rights and liabilities of parties in a contract of guarantee have to be determined strictly in accordance with terms and conditions of guarantee without recourse to underlined contract---Guarantee, whether captioned as a "bank guarantee" or "performance bond" or "performance security" issued by a bank or an insurance company, is an autonomous contract and imposes an absolute obligation on guarantor to fulfill its terms---It is the language of contract of guarantee that reveals intention of parties---Where a bank / insurance company gives a guarantee in absolute and unconditional terms and where payment is to be made on demand irrespective of the dispute and differences between parties to underlying contract, bank / insurance company is duty bound to honour its obligation and it cannot be prevented by an injunction from honouring such obligation---Irrevocable commitment in the form of irrevocable bank guarantee cannot be interfered with by Courts, except where a case of fraud or irretrievable injustice has been made out---Terms of Performance Security do not defer a claim for its encashment until the resolution of disputes between the parties to underlined contract---Courts do their utmost to enforce a guarantee according to its terms and do not interfere by way of an injunction to prevent its enforcement---High Court set aside interim injunction issued by Trial Courts in favour of respondent / plaintiff restraining encashment of Performance Security in question---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

       Sambo Construction Co. Ltd. v. Laraib Energy Limited 2021 CLC 1914; Montage Design Build v. Republic of Tajikistan 2015 CLD 8; Standard Construction Company (Pvt.) Limited v. Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Communications 2010 SCMR 524; Shipyard K. Damen International v. Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works Ltd. PLD 2003 SC 191; Pak Consulting and Engineering (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Pakistan Steel Mills 2002 SCMR 1781; National Construction Ltd. v. Aiwan-e-Iqbal Authority PLD 1994 SC 311; Pakistan Real Estate Investment and Management Company Private Limited v. M/s Sky Blue Builders 2021 CLD 518; Husein Industries Ltd. v. Sui Southern Gas Company Ltd. PLD 2020 Sindh 551; Shipyard K. Damen International v. Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works Limited 2003 CLD 1 and Sirafi Trading Establishment v. Trading Corporation of Pakistan Ltd. 1984 CLC 381 rel.

            Malik Muhammad Tariq Rajwana for Appellant.

            Sahibzada Uzair Hashim, Ali Ahmad Shah and Raja Hamza Tahir for Respondent No.1.

            Malik Zaheer Abbas Tipu, representative for Respondent No.3.

 
اس کیس میں، معاہدہ (موحدہ) یہ تھا کہ Messrs KAC-UCC JV قومی شاہراہ اتھارٹی (NHA) کے ساتھ طے شدہ شرائط کے مطابق کام انجام دے گی۔

گارنٹی:
معاہدے کے تحت کمپنی نے پرفارمنس گارنٹی دی تھی، جو اس بات کی ضمانت تھی کہ اگر کمپنی معاہدے کی شرائط پر عمل نہیں کرتی تو NHA گارنٹی کی رقم انکیش کروا سکتی ہے۔

معاہدے پر عمل نہ ہونا:
NHA نے الزام لگایا کہ کمپنی معاہدے کی شرائط پوری کرنے میں ناکام رہی، جس کے نتیجے میں NHA نے پرفارمنس گارنٹی کو انکیش کرنے کی کوشش کی۔

عدالتی فیصلہ:
عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ پرفارمنس گارنٹی ایک خود مختار اور غیر مشروط معاہدہ ہے، اور اس کے انکیشمنٹ کو روکنے کے لیے کوئی حکمِ امتناع جاری نہیں کیا جا سکتا، سوائے دھوکہ دہی یا ناقابل تلافی ناانصافی کے مخصوص حالات میں۔ نتیجتاً، عدالت نے پرفارمنس گارنٹی کے انکیشمنٹ پر لگایا گیا حکمِ امتناع ختم کر دیا۔



2024 C L C 1514




For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.






  













 



 







































 





































and

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Property ki taqseem ,Warasat main warson ka hisa

Punishment for violation of section 144 crpc | dafa 144 in Pakistan means,kia hai , khalaf warzi per kitni punishment hu gi،kab or kese lagai ja ja sakti hai.

Bachon ki custody of minors after divorce or separation