THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.174 and 408 of 2010 DATE: 15.10.2014 WRIT APPEAL No.174 of 2010 Between:
M/s. Refex Refrigerants Limited, Chennai.
… Appellant And M/s. Hindustan Fluoro Carbons Limited, Hyderabad and two others … Respondents WRIT APPEAL No.408 of 2010 Between:
M/s. State Bank of India, Chennai.
… Appellant And M/s. Hindustan Fluoro Carbons Limited, Hyderabad and two others … Respondents This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.174 and 408 of 2010 Common Judgment: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) Even though the appeals are listed at the interlocutory stage, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of the same finally by this common judgment.
We have taken note of the version of the State Bank of India, who has sanctioned the irrevocable letter of credit.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant – State Bank of India that the letter of credit was not honoured, as the bills to support L.C were discrepant, they were returned. On return of the bills, the State Bank of Hyderabad, the third respondent in W.A.No.174 of 2010 and the second respondent in W.A.No.408 of 2010, reversed the entry. The Hon’ble trial Judge did not have an occasion to deal with the case of the State Bank of India as it could not appear. Of course, service of notice is not disputed. Therefore, we think that the matter requires to be remanded.
We allow the appeals on payment of costs of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) by the State Bank of India to each of the appearing parties i.e., the writ petitioner and the State Bank of Hyderabad. We, therefore, allow the State Bank of India to file counter-affidavit to the writ petition within two weeks from date. A copy of the counter affidavit shall be supplied to all the parties, who are free to file affidavits in response to the same within two weeks thereafter. We make it clear that it would be open for the Honb’le trial Judge to consider whether the dispute involving this matter can effectively be adjudicated in the writ jurisdiction or not. We keep all points open including the maintainability of the writ petition also. Our observations will not be binding on the Hon’ble trial Judge. We request the Hon’ble trial Judge to decide the matter within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. The costs shall be paid within fortnight from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 15.10.2014
va