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

1987 Supreme(Del) 392

SUNANDA BHANDARE
S. K. GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
HYDERABAD ALLYWN LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amit Khemka, B.D.SHARMA, D.K.KAPUR, R.K.Anand, RAMAN KAPOOR, S.P.SHARMA, Y.K.Kapur

Sananda Bhandare

( 1 ) THIS revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order of the Senior Sub Judge. Delhi dated 30th June 1987 in R. C. A. No. 37/87.

( 2 ) THE petitioner M/s Rohini Times was appointed as exclusive stockist of the respondent for the Union Territory of Delhi for sale of watches by way of a memorandum of understanding between the respondent and the petitioner dated 1st August 1984. Clause I of the memorandum of understanding reads as follows:

1. This Memorandum of Understanding shall remain in force for a period of "six MONTHS" from the date of its execution. The principal reserves the right to terminate this understanding within this period with or without notice at any time, and without assigning any reason whatsoever. "the case of the petitioner is that this understanding continued till date and the appointment of the petitioner as a stockist was not terminated at any stage, however the respondent committed breach of terms of agency and started marketing their products through various dealers in contravention of the terms of the agency. The petitioner, therefore, on 20th April 1987 filed a suit for permanent injuncti




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