month of March
2014 for utilizing services of plaintiff on creative Retainership
basis and plaintiff was appointed as Creative Retainer by
defendant ... business with
the defendants. Defendants admitted that plaintiff sent a proposal
of retainership at monthly charge of Rs.80,000/- per month but
the same
Arbitrator has
erred in construing the contract as creating a relation of
retainership between the petitioner and the respondent. In
view of the aforesaid settled
plaintiff No. 1 has rendered his services as
per the agreement of retainership and agreement dated
08.12.2009. Plaintiff No.1 has also led evidence that ... that it was he who
had personally entered into a contract of retainership with
defendant no. 1 and later on become partner as well
also retainer of several
companies and he was doing work of retainership of all transactions of plaintiff
firm including financial and legal issues and doesn
