Back
AMIT BANSAL
Global Music Junction Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Annapurna Films Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Amit Bansal, J.
I.A. 16789/2022 (u/O-XXXIX R-1 & 2 of CPC) and I.A. 19779/2022 (of the defendant no. 6 u/O-XXXIX R-4 of CPC)
1. By way of this judgment, I shall dispose of I.A. 16789/2022 filed on behalf of the plaintiff for grant of interim relief under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and I.A. 19779/2022 filed on behalf of the defendant no. 6 under Order XXXIX Rule 4 of the CPC for vacation of the ex parte ad interim injunction order passed by this Court on 14th October, 2022.
CASE SET UP IN THE PLAINT
2. Brief facts as set out in the plaint are as follows:
2.1. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of production, aggregation, distribution and monetization of music and entertainment content.
2.2. The defendant no. 1 company is engaged in the business of production, marketing and monetization of music and entertainment content. The defendants no. 2-4 are entertainment channels on the platform of the defendant no. 5. The defendant no. 5 is YouTube LLC, an online video sharing and social media platform. The defendant no. 6, Mr. Shatrughan Kumar @ Khesari Lal Yadav, is a famous actor/singer/dancer of the Bhojpuri Film Industry.
2.
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.
A contract that is inherently terminable does not prevent the enforcement of specific performance claims if the termination is contested as being unjust or improper.
A contract that is determinable in nature cannot be specifically enforced, and no injunction against termination and enforcement of the contract can be issued.
Termination of service - Respondent/defendant stopped reporting for work/duty and which as aforesaid would amount to termination of Service Contract by respondent/defendant - Not open to the appellan....
The court established that contracts resulting from unequal bargaining power and misrepresentation may be deemed void, allowing for injunctions to protect parties from irreparable harm.
A determinable contract, such as an insurance contract subject to renewal, cannot be specifically enforced under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, and no injunction can be granted to prevent its....
The court ruled that contractual exclusivity claims are contingent upon the specific terms and duration of the agreement, emphasizing the necessity of demonstrating a prima facie case for interim rel....
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.
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
