Page 22 - Banking Finance April 2020

LEGAL UPDATE

LEGAL

CASES
CASES
CASES
CASES
CASES

SC dismisses petro firms’ Buyer not entitled to gifts that the buyer was not entitled to the
gifts by merely buying vouchers, with-
appeal for buying leased through vouchers pur- out fulfilling other conditions.

land chase, without fulfilling
The Supreme Court has dismissed the other conditions Delhi HC dismisses minis-
appeals of three government-owned Gifts offered by corporates come with try of youth affairs’ appeal
petroleum companies which wanted
strings; it was evident in the judgment against CWG contract ar-
the court to direct their landlords to
of the Supreme Court in Today Mer-
sell the leasehold land to them. The bitration
chandise vs Anil Kumar. The company
companies had constructed petrol The Delhi High Court has dismissed for
advertised holiday vouchers on its
pumps and given them to their deal-
website which would enable buyers to the second time the appeal of the min-
ers long ago, even before nationaliza-
get gifts like laptops, cell phones and istry of youth affairs challenging an
tion, under dealership agreements.
LED TV sets. arbitral award against it in its dispute
with a consortium, Gl Litmus Events.
The companies were not in actual pos-
But there was a condition: The gift The disputes go back to the contracts
session of the land given to their deal-
would be contingent on the number of in the Commonwealth Games held in
ers. There was no time limit mentioned referrals the buyer makes. This buyer New Delhi around 10 years ago.
in the lease deed. The companies now
bought three vouchers and claimed
wanted the court to fix the price for The consortium had complained about
gifts on them.
the land and sell the plots to them. The non-payment of dues and the matter
three companies, Bharat Petroleum The company rejected the claim as he was decided against the government.
Corporation, India Oil Corporation, and did not refer it to anyone. The buyer It challenged parts of it last Septem-
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation in- moved the consumer forum and suc- ber and lost in most of them. Now it
voked the Madras City Tenants’ Pro- ceeded in convincing it that he suf- again lost on other parts when the high
tection Act to claim the right. fered mental torture because of his court rejected its arguments. The gov-
disappointment. The company’s appeal ernment had argued that under the
The Madras High Court had earlier dis- against the order of compensation contract, it was absolved from paying
missed their plea as the companies failed in the appellate forum. compensation and interest.
were not in actual possession of the
land, yet given the plots to their deal- But on the last appeal, the company The court repelled the contention and
ers. The Supreme Court upheld that succeeded in overturning all the orders stated that the tribunal had found that
view. against it. The Supreme Court stated the company “was illegally deprived of

20 | 2020 | APRIL | BANKING FINANCE