OCD-3
In the High Court at Calcutta
Commercial Division
Original Side
CS-COM/20/2026
IA No. GA-COM/1/2026, GA-COM/2/2026
TECHNO ELECTRIC AND ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED
VS
YES BANK LIMITED AND ANR
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY
Date : February 27, 2026.
Appearance:
Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Suddhasatva Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Trivedi, Adv.
Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharyya, Adv.
Mr. Sanket Sarawgi, Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Nayak, Adv.
Mr. Sriparna Mitra, Adv.
Mr. Niket Ojha, Adv.
... for the plaintiff
Mr. Avishek Guha, Adv.
... for the defendant No.1
In Re: CS-COM/20/2026
The Court: In view of the urgency contemplated in paragraph 59 of
the plaint, the requirement of formalities to go for mediation under Section
12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (for short "CC Act") stands
dispensed with.
Accordingly, leave is granted under Section 12A of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to institute the suit.
2
On perusal of the averments made in the plaint and specifically in
paragraph 55 thereof, leave is granted under Clause 12 of the Letters
Patent, 1865 to institute the suit before this Court.
In view of the averments made in paragraph 57 of the plaint, leave
is granted under Order II Rule 2 of CPC, 1908.
Resultantly, the plaint stands admitted subject to scrutiny by the
department.
In Re: IA No. GA-COM/1/2026,
GA-COM/2/2026
Ms. Sriparna Mitra, learned Advocate, led by Mr. Jishnu
Chowdhury, learned Senior Advocate appears for the plaintiff.
Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
Mr. Avishek Guha, learned Advocate appears for the defendant
no.1.
Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, learned Senior Advocate submits that
notice has already been served upon the defendant no.2 through its official
email id, as would be evident from the affidavit of service, even then, the
defendant no.2 is not represented.
The plaintiff has executed infrastructural contract and completed
the work under the contract entered into by and between the plaintiff and
the defendant No.2. As a stipulation of the contract, the plaintiff had to
furnish Bank Guarantees for a total sum of Rs.18 crore of which more than
Rs.9 crore is by way of Retention Money Bank Guarantee.
Referring to various pages from the petition, inter alia, pages 289
to 300 from the petition, Mr. Chowdhury, learned Senior Advocate submits
CS-COM/20/2026
IA No. GA-COM/1/2026, GA-COM/2/2026
A.R., J.
that the acceptance of work had duly been certified by the defendants
without any contemporaneous objection. When the petitioner issued a
demand notice upon the defendant No.2 for release of the Bank Guarantee
on the ground mentioned therein as the work has been performed long back
in 2021, the defendant No.2, for the first time, by its letter dated March 12,
2024 at page 302 to the petition has raised counter demand for more than
Rs.9 crore.
Final result is invocation of the Retention Money Bank Guarantee,
which has been invoked on February 23, 2026 at page 349 of the petition.
Hence, this suit along with two injunction applications.
While making submissions, Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, learned
Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner has also drawn attention of this
Court to the entire contract including the forum selection clause being
Clause 36 at page 54 to the petition.
He submits that Bank Guarantee is an independent tripartite
contract between the parties in the instant suit and the work contract under
which the plaintiff executed the work, is a bipartite one between the plaintiff
and the second defendant. Hence, the suit is maintainable before this Court
in its present form.
Mr. Avishek Guha, learned Advocate appearing for the defendant
No.1 submits that invocation of Bank Guarantee is depending on the
performance of the main contract between the plaintiff and the defendant
No.2. Therefore, the invocation action cannot be segregated from the main
contract. The role of the defendant No.1 is very limited only to the extent to
hold the money and on demand of beneficiary to release it. This is an
CS-COM/20/2026
IA No. GA-COM/1/2026, GA-COM/2/2026
A.R., J.
unconditional Bank Guarantee which, inter alia, stipulates if there is a
single letter from beneficiary that there is a violation of the contractual
terms against the plaintiff, the bank was obliged to release the Bank
Guarantee without going into any dispute.
After considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties
and on perusal of the forum selection clause, this Court, at the first stage,
feels to hear the parties on the forum selection clause qua the present suit.
Opportunity is granted to the defendant No.2 to be represented
and make its submissions on the next day.
On the joint prayer of the parties, the matter shall appear under
the heading "New Motion" on March 9, 2026.
The petitioner shall serve one more notice to the defendant No.2
along with a copy of today's order and file affidavit of service on the next
day.
(ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.)
RS
CS-COM/20/2026
IA No. GA-COM/1/2026, GA-COM/2/2026
A.R., J.
