9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of the term "Security" in response to a court call. 2. Acceptance of bank guarantee as security. 3. Production of documents from defendant No.3's custody. Analysis: Issue 1: Interpretation of the term "Security" The judgment involved a dispute regarding whether a person or institution can provide security themselves or if it must come from a third-party surety. The court examined various definitions of "security" from legal sources, emphasizing that security aims to make the enforcement of a right more secure and certain. It was noted that a security does not always require a third-party surety, and bank guarantees are commonly accepted as securities, especially in civil disputes. The court concluded that the bank guarantee provided by the plaintiff satisfied the requirement of security, even though it was from the plaintiff itself. Issue 2: Acceptance of bank guarantee as security The plaintiff bank sought to withdraw a sum deposited by defendant No.3 along with accrued interest, after furnishing a bank guarantee as security. Defendant No.3 objected, arguing that security should involve a third-party surety. However, the court held that the bank guarantee fulfilled the security requirement, as it offered protection and assurance for the enforcement of rights. The court clarified that the bank guarantee extended to cover the interest accrued on the principal amount, allowing the plaintiff to withdraw the sum under this condition. Issue 3: Production of documents from defendant No.3's custody Another aspect of the judgment involved an application seeking the production of documents from defendant No.3's custody under Order II Rule 14 Civil Procedure Code. Defendant No.3 resisted, claiming a banker's lien on the documents. The court ruled that the relevancy of the documents at trial was undisputed and ordered defendant No.3 to produce certified true photocopies of the documents. The court specified that the banker's lien, if any, would not be lost by producing photocopies, with the defendant undertaking to provide the originals when required. In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of "security," accepted a bank guarantee as a valid form of security, and addressed the production of documents from defendant No.3's custody, ensuring the protection of rights and obligations in the legal dispute.
|
