Back
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, UDAY KUMAR
Standard Chartered Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sanjib Kumar Dey, alias Sanjib Dey – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff challenges notice (Para 1) |
| 2. injunction application filed (Para 4) |
| 3. interim injunction granted (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. plaintiff's counter-argument (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. court's interpretation of notice (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 6. contract deemed determinable (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 53) |
| 7. injunction orders set aside (Para 52) |
JUDGMENT :
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
1. The two appeals are taken up for hearing together, since both arise from connected orders passed in the same suit.
2. The plaintiff/respondent no.1 is an employee of the defendant no. 1/appellant-bank by virtue of an offer of appointment and employment agreement dated January 20, 2015. The defendant no. 2/respondent no. 2 is a Mumbai branch of the appellant-bank.
3. The genesis of the appeals is a suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent no. 1, inter alia, for a decree of declaration that issuance of a letter dated January 29, 2024 by the defendants to the plaintiffs is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction, a declaration that the l
The court ruled that an employment contract can be determinable, allowing for potential termination without an injunction, and that specific performance is permissible under amended provisions of the....
A contract that is determinable in nature cannot be specifically enforced, and no injunction against termination and enforcement of the contract can be issued.
A contract with specific termination conditions is not inherently determinable under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, allowing for interim relief to maintain status quo pending arbitration.
Contracts of personal service cannot be specifically enforced under the Specific Relief Act, except in limited exceptions.
A contract of personal service is not enforceable except for three exceptions, as per the provisions of Sections 14 & 41 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
A suit for damages due to wrongful termination must include a declaration of wrongful termination to be maintainable; reinstatement cannot be granted without such a request.
The court held that a contract of personal service is not specifically enforceable, and restrictions on trade after termination violate Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act.
Contracts for personal service cannot be specifically enforced except under limited circumstances; remedies reside in damages for wrongful termination.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
