Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi for Luthra: I want to get through the entire rejoinder (in two sittings).
I would like to have an interrupted flow as far asother side is concerned : Singhvi
I may just go a tail end after Dr Singhvi finishes : Senior Adv Siddharth Luthra
Single judge appears to fault me by saying that they are equal partners and there is no master servant: Singhvi
This is as if our case is of master-servant. This appears to be a straw man argument set up by the respondent. I said I had additional rights. Rights are not equal. It doens't mean one is master, one is servant : Singhvi
Additional rights are clear from three clauses. I've supplied a compilation : Singhvi
They are basically..makes it clear that I have right to appraise Saraf and alone have the right to terminate. Partnership is the paramount document. If it gives me more rights, doens't mean there is master-servant relationship: Singhvi
It is a fallacy is law to think that because one party has right to terminate or expel, it doens't not detract at all from the partnership: Singhvi
It is directly contrary to partnership law : Singhvi
Singhvi takes the court through Single Judge order.
Queen bee and worker bees.. I never argued master-servant. It is an additional rights case. It doesn't mean there is no partnership: Singhvi
Single judge has gone back and forth in contradictory order: Singhvi
He holds prima facie I have the power of terminating Saraf. Para 33. This is a clear finding in my favour. He then goes on to say that in view of remaining part of clause, the termination power is for persons other than Saraf: Singhvi
7A makes no such distinction. The Single Judge funds termination power but not qua one man, Saraf: Singhvi
Finds*
Singhvi takes the court through Single Judge order.
This interpretation is contrary to terms of the contract: Singhvi
He takes the termination power and then circumscribes it : Singhvi as he continues to read
There are independent powers of termination. So what if I have independent power of performance review: Singhvi
Where is termination linked to termination of those who come through my equity : Singhvi
He truncates 7A by reference to 9. This is re writing the contract: Singhvi
We are now getting into semantic exercise: Singhvi as he reads single judge order
In partnership deed, there is a word termination and it shall be with RKL, nobody can rewrite those clauses: Singhvi
How can court terminate the power of termination and supercede it with expulsion : Singhvi.
You have not shown that termination is a prohibited activity: Singhvi.
There are errors on the face of the judgement: Singhvi
Terminate can't have different meanings for different clauses: Singhvi
People used termination as commonsense. We used termination and expulsion as one thing. It doens't mean termination is obliterated: Singhvi
It is not mere word of documents.. the overall holistic picture has to be seen. Either they have to used interchangeably or expand power: Singhvi
The substance of the document determine its power. By changing the word, you don't change the substance: Singhvi
I can't understand this : Singhvi on Single Judge's finding on absence of explicit power to expel
Appraisal doesn't get subsumed by termination clause: Singhvi
Singhvi reads the relevant portion of the deed.
This is looking at the contract not holistically: Singhvi
Termination is what termination says: Singhvi
Performance appraisal is a different activity. Induction of new partners is a new activity. You can't jumble all up: Singhvi
From this scheme of the deed, you can't say that there is no termination power with respect to Saraf: Singhvi
Singhvi comes to the finding of absence of good faith.
One reason why Single Judge says absence of good faith is because I didn't challenge letter of 12/10/2020. Saraf says I've been retired : Singhvi
Is it not ironical that one partner telling the other you've compulsorily retired, Mr Saraf fires the first salvo, but that is not lack of good faith. I don't have to challenge it in section 9: Singhvi
This is patent bad faith.. : Singhvi
We're talking of good faith. Look at the irony: Singhvi
He retires me. His retirement concept is the alter ego of termination: Singhvi
On the same night, he (Saraf) appoints 23 new partners: Singhvi
It is not fair to allow him to argue what should have been argued as opening statement: Senior Adv Vikas Singh for Saraf
In his dictionary, compulsory retirement is termination. Then the firm should stand dissolved. But what is most interesting is that on the same, I say I've not retired.. : Singhvi
My grounds of termination on 13/10 are varied : Singhvi
Neither the court nor any adhesive join the unjoinable. The path to hell is sometimes paved with good intentions: Singhvi as he suggests that some ad hoc money be paid pending Arbitration.
It can't be that Luthra & Luthra is run by Saraf. Take partners.. living together is worst form of toxic marriage: Singhvi
It is not as if power to terminate is given at will to Luthra. Whether such a contingency has arisen or not, has to be seen by the Arbitrator: Court
It is not going to be sit out : Singhvi
All of us are part of one fraternity. We are all feeling very bad..at this stage we don't want (to say who is wrong). we don't want to comment on anyone's conduct. I've never seen Mr Saraf but he's also a lawyer : Court
Let them continue for six months.. : Court
We are not wanting to curtail arguments. If you put your minds together.. : Court
I don't think it will work.. Mr Salve told me he also tried his best : Singhvi
We are only wanting a working arrangement: Court
Let me back to it in law and equity on the next date : Singhvi
Singhvi continues with his submissions
Singhvi details teb material breaches. Finding of Single judge that I didn't challenge 12/10.. I have denied it on the same say. You appointed 23 more. How is it that my non-challenge make out an injunction in Section 9: Singhvi
This (notice) is extended four times but neither extension or notice is challenged by Saraf. My submission is judge the merit and not whether someone challenged it or not : Singhvi
In a two member firm, the terminating partner will always be interested. Nobody is saying power of termination is given to Saraf: Singhvi
After 6/1/2020 when I sent him notice, all my replies are saying that I will stay and you have to leave : Singhvi
From Jan 2020 this is my stand. Now you're saying, I've retired. Luthra & Luthra can't be run by Saraf: Singhvi
My case is .. I've cited clauses (to show power of termination). Law permits implied power but I don't have to go that far. : Singhvi
Court proceeds to adjourn the hearing.
Hearing adjourned till April 6.
Rajiv Luthra v. Mohit Saraf: Read a full LIVE account of the Delhi High Court hearing today
Justice DY Chandrachud led bench hears a petition on whether the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) exercise its jurisdiction over railway areas without the consent of the concerned State government (Anup Majee vs State of WB)
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi: FIR was registered against me for coal being stolen from ECL. But FIR was registered against us by CBI even when consent was withdrawn thus it was a forbidden territory for them. Police is State subject.
Rohatgi: Central Police cannot March its own army in the state territory and say they will probe the offence superseding the jurisdiction of State authority.
[Day 8] 5-judge Constitution bench of Supreme Court will continue hearing the challenge to Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes Act which provides educational and employment reservation to #Marathas.
Bench led by Justice SS Shinde in the previous hearing asked the prosecution to get instructions on the possible timeline for completion of the investigation.
CJI SA Bobde led bench to shortly hear NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR's) application seeking an interim direction to bar the sale of Electoral Bonds. #SupremeCourt #ElectoralBonds
Plea states #ElecroralBonds led to annual contribution reports of political parties to be furnished to ECI which need not mention names and addresses of those contributing by way of electoral bonds, thereby killing transparency in political funding
#SupremeCourt bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R. Subhash Reddy to shortly hear plea by Former Mumbai Police Commissioner Para. Bir Singh seeking CBI probe against "corrupt malpractices" by state Home Minister Anil Deshmukh @AnilDeshmukhNCP @CPMumbaiPolice
Plea by Singh also challenges the order passed by the State on March 17 transferring Singh from the post of Commissioner, Mumbai Police as being violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution
Justice DY Chandrachud e-inaugurates 3 E-Seva Kendras for the Patna High Court, Patna Civil Court, Panchayat Raj, Lakhnaur.
Patna HC CJ Sanjay Karol observed that the E-Seva Kendras will aid in access to justice for all stakeholders even in the remotest areas.
Justice Chandrachud observes that it is symbolic, as Chief Justice Karol said, that the e-Seva Kendras are being inaugurated a year after the COVID-19 lockdown was announced.
Justice Chandrachud: We are meeting here with a sense of hope, amidst loss.
Justice Chandrachud observes that there is a united sense of hardship shared by Indians across the country, which helps in understanding what is being overcome.