Plaintiff (Bank) filed the commercial suit at the
It is alleged that the Minister for Textile in
"The plaintiff (Bank) claims against the defendant (Company) is for payment of
It is alleged that the Company issued the guarantee as security for repayment of certain interest bearing credit facilities extended by the bank pursuant to a letter dated
Furthermore, it is alleged, the credit facilities extended to the borrower and guaranteed by the defendant were in relation to the performance of a road construction contract between the company jointly with another party on the one hand and
"It was the term of the guarantee that if the borrower defaults in the repayment of the credit facilities to the plaintiff then the defendant would immediately on demand pay any outstanding amounts," states the plaint of the suit.
In spite of the demand by the plaintiff the borrower, until the date of the filing of the suit, has neglected or failed or refused to pay the money.
However, in its written statement of defence, the construction company has denied the allegations and requested the court to dismiss the suit in question with costs.
The company alleges that the documents relied upon by the plaintiff in support of his case do not show that in fact the loans were duly advanced and they were never made aware of any advances, only to be surprised with the demand notice served upon them.
Most Popular Stories
- Sutherland Responds to 'Unprofessional' Jibe
- Business Leaders Set for CHCC Convention
- Twitter's Stock Rises on Stellar Revenues
- Is California Going to Land Tesla's Battery Plant?
- DishLATINO Wins Hispanic TV Award
- Ebola Outbreak Strikes Fear in Minnesota
- Judge Orders Kurdistan Oil Seized
- Beyonce Seen Apartment Shopping in NYC Without Jay Z
- U.S. Consumer Confidence at Strongest Since 2007
- U.S. Home Price Gains Slow for 6th Month in a Row