Telangana HC Checks Enforceability of Order on Foreign Govt Agencies
Hyderabad: The enforceability of the Telangana High Court’s order directing international government agencies to maintain status quo came to be considered before the Telangana High Court on Tuesday. An international arbitration commercial application was filed by SEW Infrastructure Limited, incorporated in India, seeking a restraining order against Bank of Abyssinia and State Bank of India from invoking counter bank guarantees. The applicant company entered into a contract with the Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA), a government agency of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. In case of failure of a party to compensate, as is the norm in many international commercial contracts, a bank guarantee was drawn by the Bank of Abyssinia, which was counter-guaranteed by the SBI. In 2016, the applicant company had approached the Telangana High Court seeking status quo among the parties. Subsequently, a status quo was ordered against all the parties. Even after communication of that order, the ERA approached the Bank of Abyssinia and invoked the bank guarantee arguing that as per the contract the applicable law was the law of Ethiopia and thus Indian courts had no jurisdiction over the matter. The ERA approached the court of law in Ethiopia seeking a direction against the Bank of Abyssinia to honour the bank guarantee. The Bank of Abyssinia after having honoured the advance bank guarantee in favour of the ERA, invoked the counter-guarantee requesting SBI to further honour it, to which SBI refused to honour the counter-guarantee citing the High Court’s order directing status quo. Senior counsel Avinash Desai, appearing on behalf of the applicant company, argued that as per the principle of reciprocity under private international law, there existed mutual respect between states. He cited the Supreme Court of India’s judgment that stated that a party could not decide whether the court would or would not have jurisdiction and willingly violate an order. It was, rather, upon the courts to determine applicability of an order passed by a court overseas. The Ethiopian court of law was not informed about the status quo ordered by the Telangana High Court. The court thus faced the question to determine whether the ERA was bound by the status quo ordered by the Telangana High Court in 2016 or not, and whether the ERA was well within its rights to approach an Ethiopian court of law to seek invocation of bank guarantee. A notice was served upon the ERA through the Indian Embassy, yet no representation was made before the Telangana High Court on the date of hearing. After hearing the arguments of the applicant company, Justice T. Vinod Kumar posted the matter for further adjudication specially for the response of the ERA, Bank of Abyssinia and SBI.
Senior counsel seeks fee from HMRL
Justice C.V. Bhasker Reddy of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the action of Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited in not paying interest on legal remuneration fee to a senior advocate. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by senior advocate K. Ramakrishna Reddi, a former advocate general, seeking a direction to the respondent authority to settle outstanding legal fees owed to him for his legal representations on behalf of the respondent in numerous matters before various courts. The petitioner stated that the court earlier directed the respondent to pay 12 per cent interest per annum on the outstanding legal fees from the date of the petitioner’s letter until the date of realisation, with a three-month deadline for compliance. The petitioner stated despite more than six months since the date of passing the order and respondents admitting their liability, they were yet to fulfil the court’s directive. Counsel for the respondent stated that there were discrepancies in the interest claimed by the petitioner and requested additional time. The judge posted the matter after two weeks.
Astrologer challenges Women panel action
Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging summons issued by the Telangana State Commission for Women (TSCW) to astrologer Venu Swamy. The petitioner approached the court questioning the summons issued by TSCW in August against him. The petitioner alleged that the summons issued to him was illegal as no preliminary investigation was conducted by the TSCW into the subject issue. The petitioner stated that the provisions of TSCW Act mandated the commission to satisfy itself that the subject complaint made against the petitioner required to be enquired into, prior to issuing summons. The judge directed the government pleader appearing on behalf of TSCW to produce records relating to preliminary investigation undertaken by the commission and the material on record which warranted the issuance of the impugned summons against the petitioner, by the next date of hearing. The judge directed the respondent authority to file their response and posted the matter for further adjudication.
Denied promotion, official moves HC
Telangana High Court will examine the action of the state endowments department and the commissioner of endowments in not considering the claim of a retired assistant commissioner of endowments for promotion. Justice Pulla Karthik took on file a writ plea filed by L. Prabhakar. The petitioner alleged that the respondent authorities had failed to implement orders passed by Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), by not considering the claim of the petitioner for the post of deputy commissioner of endowments with all consequential benefits. The petitioner stated that the action of the respondents in not implementing the earlier orders passed by the CAT despite making repeated requests was illegal and in violation of the Constitution. The judge directed the government pleader for respondent authorities to get instructions and posted the matter for further adjudication.
