Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2013 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (4) TMI 334 - HC - Companies LawSection 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Violation of the terms of the Agreement - Section 27 of the Contract Act, 1872 as the doctrine of restraint of trade - Nature of interim order - Held that :- . It has been argued that incase, the respondent is allowed to get away from his such deeds without any pinch, wrong message would also go to the similar situated employees who may do the same without any fear and fairness - In normal case, such argument would not have been considered but in the present case it is evident from the entire gamut of the matter, the respondent had been negotiating with the competitor of the petitioner during the terms of the agreement. Further, the modus operandi adopted by him at the time of termination of contract was not straight and frank. Rather in his e-mail dated 13th February, 2013 he asked the petitioner not to resort to manipulating tactics and reserved his right to take action against the petitioner for damages and loss. In order to give him a correct message, it has become necessary to pass some interim directions, the respondent is restrained for the period of seven days between 12th April, 2013 to 18th April, 2013 from any manner engaging or providing services either as a presenter, host, anchor, reporter or in any other manner on-screen solo of television in any channel including in the channel where he has been recruited - No further orders are required to be passed - The petition is accordingly disposed
|