Court grants extension for corporate guarantee submission, not substitution, citing valid reasons. The court granted the applicant an extension of time until 25th June 2019 to provide the corporate guarantee as directed in a previous judgment. The delay ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court grants extension for corporate guarantee submission, not substitution, citing valid reasons.
The court granted the applicant an extension of time until 25th June 2019 to provide the corporate guarantee as directed in a previous judgment. The delay in accessing the judgment on the court's website and challenges in stamping the guarantee were considered valid reasons for the extension. The court clarified that the application only sought more time for the corporate guarantee submission, not a substitution with a bank guarantee. If the third respondent requires a specific format for the guarantee, an additional four weeks will be granted from notification.
Issues: Application for extension of time for providing bank guarantee as directed by the court.
Analysis: 1. The applicant sought an extension of time for providing a bank guarantee as directed by the court in a previous judgment. The court had ordered the parent company to provide a corporate guarantee within three weeks from the date of the judgment.
2. The applicant faced delays in submitting the bank guarantee due to the unavailability of the judgment on the court's website until 24th May 2019. The applicant forwarded a draft corporate guarantee to the third respondent for approval, but it was pending administrative approval. The applicant then requested its parent company to provide the corporate guarantee to show compliance with the court's directions.
3. The parent company executed the corporate guarantee on 11th June 2019 and sent it to the applicant's lawyer, who received it on 14th June 2019. The applicant faced challenges in getting the corporate guarantee stamped through franking from banks, so it was transmitted to the third respondent via email and registered post on 19th June 2019, received by the third respondent on 24th June 2019.
4. The respondent opposed the application, stating that the judgment was clear in requiring the corporate guarantee to be submitted within three weeks from the date of the judgment. They raised concerns about the adequacy of the corporate guarantee provided by the parent company, suggesting a bank guarantee instead.
5. The court noted that the application only sought an extension of time for submitting the corporate guarantee and not a modification of the judgment to replace it with a bank guarantee. Considering the delay in uploading the judgment and the applicant's efforts to comply, the court found the application reasonable and allowed the extension until 25th June 2019. If the third respondent prescribes a specific format for the corporate guarantee, the time limit will be extended by four weeks from the notification of such format.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
