Judgment · High Court

would suffer irreparable loss and injury. Mrs. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that since the appellant is blacklisted, for the reasons cited for that, the respond ent No.1 would be at liberty to encash the bank guarantee. It appears from the order dated 15th July, 2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.3, Kamrup at Guwahati that the application filed under Sectio n 9 of the aforesaid Act is pending, which is fixed on 5th August, 2013 for the purpose, as noticed above. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also the fact tha t Section 9 application is fixed for consideration on 5th August, 2013, I am of the view that an order is required to be passed in favour of the appellant and h ence, the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 are restrained from invoking the bank guaran tee given by the present appellant for performance of the contract in question, till 5th August, 2013, i.e. the date fixed by the learned Additional District Ju dge. The appellant and the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 shall appear before the le arned Additional District Judge No.3 on 5th August, 2013, who shall decide the s aid proceeding in accordance with law. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.