https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292427 The Appellant's appeal was dismissed by the Court, which found that the supplemental agreement lacked consideration and was entered into under duress and coercion. The Court decreed damages for non-delivery of 89.607 tonnes of dal under the original agreement but rejected other claims tied to the supplemental agreement. The Court determined that the supplemental agreement required separate consideration and that the Appellant's argument regarding the forbearance of enforcing bank guarantees was unsupported, as the original agreement had been fulfilled. Consequently, the claims based on the supplemental agreement were not enforceable, affirming the Respondents' position. en-us Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2024 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292427 The Appellant's appeal was dismissed by the Court, which found that the supplemental agreement lacked consideration and was entered into under duress and coercion. The Court decreed damages for non-delivery of 89.607 tonnes of dal under the original agreement but rejected other claims tied to the supplemental agreement. The Court determined that the supplemental agreement required separate consideration and that the Appellant's argument regarding the forbearance of enforcing bank guarantees was unsupported, as the original agreement had been fulfilled. Consequently, the claims based on the supplemental agreement were not enforceable, affirming the Respondents' position. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292427