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

2003 Supreme(Del) 213

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
PIONIR PUBLICITY CORPORATION – Appellant
Versus
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Gaurav Duggal, Jyoti Singh, MANMIT ARORA

VIKRAMAJIT SEN

( 1 ) THIS petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, praying that Respondent No. 1, Delhi Transport Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as the DTC) be restrained from taking down or defacing the advertisement panel at the back, as well as on the side panels of DTC buses. The `terms and Condition of the Tender contains an Arbitration clause. It is also not disputed that in the event of disputes arising between the parties these would be referrable to an Arbitrator for his decision.

( 2 ) IT appears that a contract was entered into between the parties in September, 2000 in respect of the `back panel right side space and inside space above window panel for the period 8. 9. 2000 to 27. 9. 2003 in terms of which the Petitioner had to pay a sum of Rs. 10,12,74,984. 00 in equal monthly instalments of Rs. 21,10,322/ -. There is a clause in this Agreement which stipulates that any decrease or increase in the number of buses will not in any manner change/alter the monthly rental fees. By Clause 9 (C) the parties were competent to terminate the contract without assigning any reason, but on giving three months notice in writing. Th












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