Brief Facts and Procedural History- The appellant is the owner of 18 gunthas of land, situated in Adilabad Municipality of A.P., which was proposed for acquisition under a notification issued…
| CASE NAME | Nur Ali Dubash v Abdul Ali, (1892) ILR 19 Cal 765 |
| COURT | Before the High Court of Calcutta |
| DECIDED ON | March 4, 1892 |
| BENCH | Justice Pigot and Justice Macpherson |
| AUTHOR OF THE JUDGEMENT | Justice PA Macpherson |
| ABSTRACT |
In the present case, there was an agreement between parties with regards to restraint of trade. Restraint of trade is dealt under section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Restraint of any lawful profession or business or trade of any kind is considered as void under law. However, with changing times, the courts have considered partial restraint of trade to be valid under the law if found to be reasonable. According to the facts of the present case, the court found that the partial restraint observed in the agreement was not unreasonable and thus void. |
| AUTHOR OF THE BRIEF | Aarsh Chokshi, Student at Gujarat National Law University. |
| KEYWORDS | Section 27-Indian Contract Act, Partial Restraint of trade, Total Restraint of trade. |
Maula Bux v. Union of India, 1970 AIR 1955, 1970 SCR (1) 928 Before the Supreme Court of India Decided on: - 19th August 1969 Bench: - JC Shah. Counsel for…
M/s Berger Paints India Ltd. V/s C.I.T., Delhi-V Before The Supreme Court of India Author of the judgement- Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.- Counsel for the appellant-Company- Mr Radha Shyam Jena Counsel…
Cyrus Investments (P.) Ltd. v. Tata sons Ltd. C.P. Nos. 82/241, 242,244/NCLT (MAH.) OF 2016 Forum: National company law tribunal, Mumbai bench Bench: B.S. V. Prakash Kumar (Judicial member) &…
Mardia Chemicals Ltd. Etc. Etc vs. U.O.I. & Ors. Etc. Etc Transfer Case (civil) 92-95 of 2002 Before the Supreme Court of India Bench: CJ. Brijesh Kumar, Justice Arun Kumar.…