Back
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Isherdas Sahni & Bros. – Appellant
Versus
Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lease agreement details and obligations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. covid-19 impact on payment obligations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. termination notice and conditions. (Para 9 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. claim for possession and recovery of rent due. (Para 13) |
| 5. defendant's arguments on force majeure. (Para 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 6. issues framed for determination. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. court's analysis on force majeure applicability. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. legal standards on contract performance impossibility. (Para 28 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 38) |
| 9. assessment of force majeure and its impact on rental obligations. (Para 49 , 50 , 63) |
| 10. nature of lease agreement regarding rent. (Para 54 , 55) |
| 11. determination of rental agreements amidst revenue-sharing claims. (Para 56 , 58) |
| 12. defendant's compliance with termination clause. (Para 60 , 62 , 64 , 66 , 68) |
| 13. interpretation and fulfillment of termination procedures under force majeure. (Para 72 , 75) |
| 14. security deposit obligations and conclusion. (Para 79 , 80 , 81 , 82) |
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J.
1. The plaintiff has filed the Suit for Possession/Ejectment, Permanent Injunction, Recovery of Arrears of Rent and Maintenance Charges, D
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
