https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299722 Courts ordinarily will not restrain invocation or encashment of an unconditional, irrevocable bank guarantee unless fraud or special equities creating irretrievable injustice are shown; ordinary tests of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury do not justify interference. On the second guarantee, the correspondence showed only a possible substitution of a bank guarantee for a demand draft, not a final contractual amendment or waiver, so the restraint against its enforcement was maintained. The appeal therefore succeeded only in relation to the first guarantee, while the injunction concerning the second guarantee remained in force. en-us Fri, 04 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Dec 2021 11:15:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299722 Courts ordinarily will not restrain invocation or encashment of an unconditional, irrevocable bank guarantee unless fraud or special equities creating irretrievable injustice are shown; ordinary tests of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury do not justify interference. On the second guarantee, the correspondence showed only a possible substitution of a bank guarantee for a demand draft, not a final contractual amendment or waiver, so the restraint against its enforcement was maintained. The appeal therefore succeeded only in relation to the first guarantee, while the injunction concerning the second guarantee remained in force. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299722