D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, M.S.SONAK
Indian Oil Corporation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Saibaba Automobiles – Respondent
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.
1. Admit. Learned counsel for the Respondent waives service. The appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal, by consent and on the request of the learned counsel.
2. The appeal arises from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge dated 25 March 2013 on a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (`the Act'). The Respondent was a dealer of the Appellant in pursuance of a dealership agreement dated 20 April 1992. On 9 May 2003, the retail outlet was raided by the district administration/police authorities during the course of which a tanker which was unloading an unidentified product into the MS tank was seized. A case was filed under the Essential Commodities Act and a notice to show cause was issued on 14 May 2003 why action should not be initiated. By a letter dated 26 May 2003, the Respondent admitted that its manager had conspired with unauthorized persons and had arranged to put solvent into motor spirit. On 7 June 2003, finding the reply to be unsatisfactory, the retail outlet of the Respondent was closed for thirty days and a penalty of Rs.20,000/- was imposed. The activity of sales at the retail outl
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.