SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Kar) 297

D.M.CHANDRASHEKHAR, N.VENKATACHALA
PARIJATHA – Appellant
Versus
KAMALAKSHA NAYAK – Respondent


Advocates:
BALACHANDRAN KARUP, BASAVARAJ BALARANG, H.R.VENKATASAMANIAH, U.L.NARAYANA RAO

VENKATACHALA, J.

( 1 ) THIS civil revision petition is before us on its reference to a Division Bench.

( 2 ) THE necessary and material facts are, briefly, these: Respondent 1 was the plaintiff in O. S. No. 442 of 1980, on the file of the Munsiff, Udupi. Respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 were defendants 2,1, 3 and 4 respectively therein. In that suit, the plaintiff, inter alia, sought a permanent injunction to restrtain defendants 3 and 4 from granting an "exhibition Certificate" respecting the motion picture "ganda- bherunda" on the allegations that defendant No. 1 represented to the plaintiff that he (deft~l) had acquired the exclusive right to exhibit than film I'gandabherunda" in Dharwar district by virtue of the agreement dated 15. 1. 79 executed in his favour by defendant-2 and one Vajramuni; that the plaintiff, on the strength of that representation, entered into an agreement dated 5. 9. 80 with defendant 2 whereunder defendant-1 had to deliver to the plaintiff by 15. 12. 80 prints of the said film enabling the latter to exhibit the same in Dharwar district: and that since the plaintiff, subsequently, learnt of the advertisements in newspapers that a certain m. J. M. Productions and

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top