Thread by @barandbench

Delhi High Court begins hearing Rajiv Luthra's appeal against Single Judge order staying the termination of Mohit Saraf from L&L partnership.

Hearing before Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Justice Sanjeev Narula.

#MohitSaraf #RajivLuthra

I had indicated the parameters withing which a section 37 appeal can be invoked: Senior Adv Parag P Tripathi for Mohit Saraf

I want to come to the list of dates : Tripathi

I'll just pick up a few important dates: Tripathi

1995-99 Mohit Saraf had joined with Mr Luthra. It was not a prosperous firm.. my client when he was a student was awarded the Shaurya Chakra : Tripathi

Law offices were born in Mumbai in 2003. The contact had a testing period of 4 and a half year period. Within this I could be asked to leave by Mr Luthra : Tripathi

And I get only half my goodwill. Testing period got over in March 2003. 1/3 and 2/3 ratio came into being in April 2003 : Tripathi

The next time frame was upto 12 years with respect to Mr Luthra's claim to Luthra & Luthra name : Tripathi

After 12 years ie. 2011, if Mr Luthra was to leave I would be the owner and keep the clients.. in 2019, I wrote a detailed communication to Mr Luthra : Tripathi

Saying good people are leaving, let's give them partnership shares. He said we wanted to explore ways and dissolve partnership: Tripathi

Tripathi continues to narrate events that unfolded thereafter.

There's a WhatsApp communication of December 2019: Tripathi

There was no mudslinging and name calling : Tripathi

This is the document which they say is the 90 day notice. Based on which they purportedly terminated my partnership: Tripathi

Tripathi says there were four extensions for amicable settlement till October end.

13/Oct is not October end. I'm expelled on October 13: Tripathi

Tripathi continues to read the list on dates on induction of new partners by Luthra.

Induction has to be with my consent. I was a partner on that day: Tripathi

The important part is he never challenged it (acceptance of his retirement).. : Tripathi

There is no expulsion clause : Tripathi

He's saying please don't change the status quo that I created by pushing him out on 13/10. Defaulting party can't take advantage of his own wrong: Tripathi

We have denied the allegation that we took money from a company being probed by enforcement agency. They don't deal with it: Tripathi

He takes down my name.. tells technical staff to remove me from mailing list.. he writes to clients saying I've expelled him : Tripathi

He sends a final settlement of accounts statement. He says 3 months salary in lieu of 90 days notice. But they argue that notice was given in January 2020. Then what was the need of giving me salary in lieu of it : Tripathi

On 16/10, my section 9 comes up. I give advance notice. They had prepared a newspaper cutting ready. They don't hold their hand.. I'm showing their conduct: Tripathi

Meditation didn't work out. 17 hearings are held in section 9.. : Tripathi

They continue to enjoy the fruits of their wrongful conduct: Tripathi

Relevant clause requires 90+90 days notice. First is for amicable settlement and second is when settlement fails : Tripathi

They didn't give me 90 days notice. All this weighed with Single Judge : Tripathi

Tripathi refers to the authorities he is relying on.

Tripathi moves on to the judgements to support his arguments.

Tripathi continues to read the judgments.

Powerlessness is no longer the principle that governs : Tripathi

Tripathi refers to judgements on Partnership not being master servant relationship.

This business of I'm a dominant partner.. you are not the master. It is not a sole proprietorship: Tripathi

The power to terminate a partner.. there is nothing called terminating a partner. This is expulsion : Tripathi

Tripathi reads a judgement.

Tripathi deals with section 33 on expulsion of partners.

Tripathi argues that save in the exercise of good faith and terms of the agreement, a partner can't be expelled by majority.

Tripathi refers to another judgement.

There is no express power. There is no implied power argument at all (to expel). Single judge says in such cases, one would be slow in reading such implied power : Tripathi

Then is the issue of utmost good faith : Tripathi

Tripathi reads from Lindley's book on Partnership.

The word termination has never been confused with expulsion in commentaries or judgements. Termination is always of deed. You expel the partner: Tripathi

Tripathi continues to read.

Tripathi reads the Single Judge observations on power to expel.

Is there any other date in this? : Court

March 12 : Tripathi

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi urges court to give a date in between so that he can argue on March 12.

We'll keep it on 12. We'll take half and hour and Mr Vikas Singh will take 15 mins : Singhvi

List on 12th: Court

List also on March 17 : Court

Hearing adjourned.