K.P. ROY & SON Vs. CASTROL INDIA LIMITED
LAWS(CAL)-2019-6-152
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 04,2019

K.P. Roy And Son Appellant
VERSUS
CASTROL INDIA LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Shampa Sarkar, J. - (1.) This revisional application has been filed being aggrieved by the order dated May 31, 2019 passed by the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas, Barasat in Misc. Appeal No.73 of 2019 refusing the prayer for ad interim injunction made by the petitioners by upholding the order dated May 29, 2019 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court at Barasat.
(2.) The petitioners filed a suit being T.S. 320 of 2019 against the opposite party for alleging illegal termination of distributorship arising out of Distributorship Agreement dated July 11, 2018. In the said suit, the petitioners prayed for declaration that the alleged termination of the agreement by the notice dated April 26, 2019 was null and void and had no effect. The petitioners prayed for an ad interim injunction restraining the opposite party from giving effect to the notice of termination dated April 26, 2019 and/or acting contrary to or inconsistent with the agreement for distributorship dated July 11, 2018. By an order dated May 29, 2019, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Barasat refused the ad interim prayer of the petitioners on the ground that the agreement contained an arbitration clause. Being aggrieved the petitioners preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge, North 24-Parganas, Barasat which was registered as Misc. Appeal No.73 of 2019. The appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed and the prayer for interim injunction was refused on similar grounds of existence of an arbitration clause, hence this revisional application.
(3.) According to the petitioners, even after the notice of termination, the opposite party has continued business transactions with the petitioners which in effect amounts to waiver of the termination. He further submits that grounds for rejection of interim order was the existence of an arbitration clause, although, Mr. Chowdhury, learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the agreement between the petitioners and the opposite party did not contain any specific arbitration clause, only a reference was made to the standard provisions for distributorship agreement. The arbitration clause in the standard provision cannot be read to the existing agreement by reference to the standard provision.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.