JUDGMENT

Dipak Misra, J.

Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. The present appeals, by special leave, call in question the legal propriety of the order dated 11.1.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in CMP No.122 of 2012 and the order dated 17.12.2013 passed in review, i.e., I.A. No.1 of 2013.

4. The facts which are necessary to be stated for adjudication of these appeals are that the appellant had entered into an agreement, which is called a “Conducting Agreement”, with the respondent on 01.02.2008. In terms of the agreement, the appellant was required to enable the respondent to conduct its business from the premises and to extend to it the benefit of permissions and licences granted to the appellant. The appellant was further required to secure an extension of its own lease in the premises in order to enable the respondent to conduct the retail shop from the premises and in return, the respondent was to pay a fixed percentage of its net sales proceeds subject to a minimum guaranteed sum of Rs. 11,00,000/-per month. Additionally, the respondent was also liable to furnish the appellant with an interest free refundable security deposit