Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.45 seconds)

Atmastco Ltd vs Mandeep Kalra on 2 July, 2024

10. Interestingly, another contention raised by the petitioner/defendant is that just like the State or its agencies do not carry out any "commercial activities" as such, but a dispute arising out of such non-commercial activities still falls under the scope of the CC Act by virtue of the Explanation clause of Section 2(1)(c) of the CC Act, in a similar fashion, the dispute arising out of the services involved in the present petition should also be deemed to be "commercial" in nature even though it arose in the course of a non- commercial activity. To further substantiate its argument, the petitioner relied upon the decision of this Court in Mohit Saraf vs Rajiv K Luthra8 to demonstrate that even though lawyers do not carry out commercial activity but when two lawyers enter into partnership agreement and a dispute arises out of such a partnership agreement, then such dispute has been held to be a "commercial dispute" within 8 O.M.P. (I) (COMM) 339/2020 Signature Not Verified C.R.P 53/2024 Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD Page 5 of 14 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:02.07.2024 17:12:52 the CC Act by this Court, even though it does not arise out of commercial activity.
Delhi High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - D K Sharma - Full Document
1