WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir – Appellant
Versus
IFFCO-TOKIO, General Insurance Company Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J.
1. The petitioner vide the present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Hereinafter referred to as the ‘The Act’) has sought the following reliefs:
(B) Respondents be directed to continue the contract upto 14.03.2025 in the interest of patient care and public at large.
(C) Pass order in favour of Petitioner and against the Respondent, thereby directing the respondent to undertake its contractual liability and in the interest of patient care, which otherwise at this stage would have serious consequences for the people of the U.T. of J&K as approximately 1200-1500 procedures take place daily in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and the general publicheavily relies on these schemes for adequate treatment, leading to improved and well-organized patient care.
(D) Any Writ, order or dire
Adhunik Steels Ltd. vs. Orissa Manganese and Minerals (P) Ltd. (2007) 7 SCC 125
Katta Sujatha Reddy vs. Siddamsetty Infra Projects (P) Ltd. (2023) 1 SCC 355
Nepa Ltd. vs. Manoj Kumar Agrawal
Siskina (Cargo Owners) vs. Distos Compania Navieria SA (The Siskina)
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....
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.
The court upheld the rejection of an interim injunction under the Arbitration Act due to the appellant's failure to establish a prima facie case and balance of convenience.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in the case of a determinable contract, no injunction against termination and enforcement of the contract can be issued.
Point of Law : Section 41(e) of the Specific Relief Act would get attracted which provided that no injunction can be granted to prevent breach of contract, the performance of which is not specificall....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.