Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S Gupta Builders vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3221 Raj/2

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3221 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2022

Rajasthan High Court
M/S Gupta Builders vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 April, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5523/2022

M/s Gupta Builders
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan and Ors.
                                                                  ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

Order

21/04/2022 Relying upon Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in case of

Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.:

MANU/SC/0516/2016 wherein it has been held that a bank

guarantee furnished under one contract cannot be subjected to

encashment in another independent contract, learned counsel for

the petitioner submitted that vide order impugned dated

21.03.2022 issued by the respondent no.2 whereby the

respondent no.3 has been required to encash the bank guarantee

submitted by the petitioner in another work contract which already

stands completed, is bad in law. He further submits that demand

sought to be raised against the petitioner does not represent

either the admitted claim or the liquidated damages.

Issue notice of writ petition as well as of stay application.

Rule is made returnable by five weeks. Notices be filed in two

sets. One set of notices be sent through registered post with

acknowledgment due. Steps to be taken within a week.

(2 of 2) [CW-5523/2022]

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on interim relief.

Taking into consideration the contention advanced by him,

the material on record and law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in case of Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. (supra), this Court is

satisfied that the petitioner has been able to make out a case of

special equity in his favour. In these circumstances, this Court

deems it just and proper to restrain the respondents from

encashing the bank guarantee till further orders if not encashed

already.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

MADAN/86

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter