Where Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt, Benefit Must Go To The Accused: Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Murder Conviction Lok Adalat Award Cannot Override Registered Lease Deed: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Execution Petition for Eviction Deemed Conveyance Does Not Enlarge Title — Civil Court Must Adjudicate Ownership Disputes: Bombay High Court Common Intention Must Be Proved—No One Can Be Convicted Solely for Being Named Among a Group: Calcutta High Court Mere Abusive Language or Threat, Without Sexual Colour, Does Not Attract Section 354A IPC: Delhi High Court Forcing a Child to Carry the Trauma Is an Assault on Dignity: Gujarat High Court Allows Termination of 15-Week Pregnancy of 14-Year-Old Rape Survivor Framing of Charge is Not a Final Order, No Appeal Lies Under Section 14A of SC/ST Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Interest Earned from Axis Bank Is ‘Attributable’ to Credit Business – Not a Separate Source of Income: ITAT Chennai Grants 80P Deduction Must Be Proved, Not May Be Proved: Karnataka High Court Upholds Triple Murder Conviction On Complete Chain Of Circumstantial Evidence Statutory Scheme Overrides Hereditary Claims: Kerala High Court Upholds Executive Officer Appointment at Malamakkavu Ayyappa Temple No Mid-Stream Change In Examination Centre Once Exams Are Underway:  Orissa High Court Draws Line On Judicial Interference Forest Allegation Found Baseless, Petitioner Had Personal Grudge: NGT Dismisses Plea Alleging Illegal Mining in Raisen Protected Forest CPC Has No Role in Consumer Forums: National Commission Slams Procedural Missteps in Insurance Complaint Transfer Case Permit Is Not a Formality, It’s a Legal Necessity: Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs Insurer to ‘Pay and Recover’ for Accident Caused by Vehicle Plying Outside Authorized States A Compromise Before Court Is Not a Private Contract but a Solemn Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail Senior Citizens Misled with FD Promises Can’t Be Bound by Insurance Contracts: Chandigarh State Commission Upholds Full Refund with Interest No Specific Forum Under Trust Act to Adjudicate Election Disputes Involving Fraud: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Civil Court Jurisdiction Mere Presence is Not Conspiracy: Kerala High Court Grants Bail in Ganja Case Where Intermediate Quantity Alone Recovered from Accused Sufficient Cause Is Not a Matter of Sympathy, But Substance: Bombay High Court Rejects 645-Day Delay in Filing Review Petition

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Indian Oil Dealership Agreement by Notice

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of termination of an Indian Oil Corporation dealership agreement by notice. The case concerned clause (3) of the dealership agreement, which permitted either party to terminate the contract by giving a three-month notice without requiring any acceptance from the other party.

The dispute arose when the respondent, a dealer, gave notice of termination of the dealership agreement, which the petitioner, Indian Oil Corporation, alleged was not accepted. The matter went to arbitration, and the arbitrator found that the notice was validly terminated and that acceptance was not necessary.

The respondent challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which was dismissed by the District Judge. However, the High Court allowed the challenge and set aside the award. It also ordered the restoration of the dealership to the respondent and left it open for them to claim damages.

On appeal, the Supreme Court held that clause (3) of the dealership agreement expressly allowed for the premature termination of the contract by either party by giving a three-month notice without requiring any acceptance. The court found that the arbitrator's decision was not perverse and closed the door for judicial intervention. The court also held that the High Court acted illegally by interfering with the arbitrator's finding and modifying the award, and it set aside the High Court's order.

Supreme Court upheld the validity of termination by notice under clause (3) of the dealership agreement and set aside the High Court's order for restoration of the dealership to the respondent and for damages.

D.D-09.May .2023

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.   vs M/S. SATHYANARAYANA SERVICE STATION & ANR    

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/09-May-2023-IOC-Vs-SATHYANARAYANA-SERVICE.pdf"]

Latest Legal News