JYOTSANA CHAUHAN Vs. ARNAV ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Rizvi, learned counsel for the applicant-respondent and Ms. Fatima Barodawala, learned counsel for the petitioner. Parties are referred as they stand in the original proceedings.

(2.) This Interim Application has been filed on behalf of the respondent praying for modification of the order dated 30 th July, 2020 passed by this Court (Coram : G.S. Kulkarni, J.). The prayers as made in the application are required to be noted, which reads thus:

(3.) Mr. Rizvi, learned counsel for the applicant, in support of the application, would again argue that the Franchise Agreement dated 31 st March, 2019 is a bogus agreement and it was only the Letter of Intent dated 5 th March, 2018 which was acted upon. He has contended that a FIR is lodged by the respondent on 19th June, 2020 complaining that the Franchise Agreement is a fabricated document. He next contends that there are also irregularities on this document interalia in regard to the stamping, hence the document is required to be presumed and be held as a bogus and fabricated document. He submits that the ad-interim order dated 30th July, 2020 passed by this Court in terms of prayers (a) and (b) of the petition is causing a prejudice to the respondent inasmuch as it restrains the respondent from carrying out business "in any other name for a period of two years from 21 st June, 2020 i.e. until 20 th June, 2022". He submits that in these circumstances, the clauses in the agreement are not binding on the respondent, hence the said order passed by this Court needs to be modified, so that the respondent can conduct business in any other name.