Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.63 seconds)
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs Ajay Bhatia on 24 November, 2021 cites

Bharat Petroleum Corp.Ltd vs Rama Chandrashkhar Vaidya & Anr on 2 April, 2013

9. The learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 21.11.2013 in CS(OS) No.1828/2006 also held to the effect that the statement made in paragraph 9 of the written statement that the lease came to an end on 31st March 2009 was an admission by Defendant No. 1 that its continuance in the suit property beyond that date is without any legal basis with there being observations also in the order dated 21.11.2013 to the effect that there was no automatic renewal of the lease and the defendant no.1 had not exercised any such right earlier by issuing any notice to the plaintiff and that as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited v. Rama Chandrashekhar Vaidya", a decision dated 2nd April 2013 in SLP (Civil) No. 15 of 2010, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had negatived the plea in that case by Defendant No. 1 thereof that there was an automatic renewal of the lease, likewise, in "Depot Superintendent, H.P. Corporation Limited v. Kolhapur Agricultural Market Committee, Kolhapur" (2007) 6 SCC 159, the Supreme Court had held that there was no automatic renewal of a lease for a petroleum retail outlet and thus, it was held that the plaintiff was entitled under Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:24.11.2021 11:58:31 This file is EX.F.A.13/2019 & EX.F.A.30/2019 Page 9 of 31 digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 18 - A Alam - Full Document

Depot Superintendent H.P.Corpn. Ltd. & ... vs Kolhapur Agri. Market Commtt. Kolhapur on 20 June, 2007

9. The learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 21.11.2013 in CS(OS) No.1828/2006 also held to the effect that the statement made in paragraph 9 of the written statement that the lease came to an end on 31st March 2009 was an admission by Defendant No. 1 that its continuance in the suit property beyond that date is without any legal basis with there being observations also in the order dated 21.11.2013 to the effect that there was no automatic renewal of the lease and the defendant no.1 had not exercised any such right earlier by issuing any notice to the plaintiff and that as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited v. Rama Chandrashekhar Vaidya", a decision dated 2nd April 2013 in SLP (Civil) No. 15 of 2010, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had negatived the plea in that case by Defendant No. 1 thereof that there was an automatic renewal of the lease, likewise, in "Depot Superintendent, H.P. Corporation Limited v. Kolhapur Agricultural Market Committee, Kolhapur" (2007) 6 SCC 159, the Supreme Court had held that there was no automatic renewal of a lease for a petroleum retail outlet and thus, it was held that the plaintiff was entitled under Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SUMIT GHAI Signing Date:24.11.2021 11:58:31 This file is EX.F.A.13/2019 & EX.F.A.30/2019 Page 9 of 31 digitally signed by PS to HMJ ANU MALHOTRA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 7 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1