Quartz Legal Associates

Call Directions Website Contact the business

Quartz Legal Associates Litigation law firm practising before the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court & NCLT. Commercial disputes, IBC/Insolvency, RERA, Section 138 & Arbitration.

Based in Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi. Book a consultation:

https://topmate.io/abhishek_singh467/

If you hold a minority stake in a company and are removed from its board, can you challenge it as oppression?The Compani...
03/10/2026

If you hold a minority stake in a company and are removed from its board, can you challenge it as oppression?

The Companies Act, 2013 does give minority shareholders a remedy. Section 241 allows a member to approach the NCLT where the company's affairs are conducted in a manner prejudicial or oppressive to members or prejudicial to the company's interests. Section 242(1) adds a further condition: winding up would unfairly prejudice the member, but the facts would otherwise justify winding up on the just and equitable ground.

The Supreme Court looked at this in Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. v. Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. (26 March 2021). It held that removal of an executive chairman or director does not by itself amount to oppression, and that no case for a just and equitable winding up had been made out.

What this means in practice (our analysis, not a court holding): rights over board seats, information and exit are best settled in the shareholders' agreement and articles before relations sour, rather than left to a petition afterwards.

Businesses and investors should review their governance and exit provisions with this in mind.

Educational content, not legal advice for your specific matter.

Quartz Legal Associates | www.quartzlegalassociates.in

An employee you trained has just joined your main competitor. Your contract says they cannot work for a rival for two ye...
02/10/2026

An employee you trained has just joined your main competitor. Your contract says they cannot work for a rival for two years. Is that clause worth anything?

Under Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, an agreement that restrains a person from a lawful profession, trade or business is void to that extent. The only express statutory exception is for the seller of a business's goodwill.

The Supreme Court has drawn a line between restrictions during employment and restrictions after it. In Niranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning (AIR 1967 SC 1098), a covenant operating during the term of employment was not treated as a restraint of trade. In Percept D'Mark v. Zaheer Khan ((2006) 4 SCC 227), a covenant extending beyond the contract term was held void. In June 2025, the Delhi High Court applied the same principle to an employee's post-termination non-compete and non-solicit clause in Varun Tyagi v. Daffodil Software.

For businesses, the practical lesson is to protect confidential information and intellectual property directly through clear contractual terms, rather than relying on a post-employment non-compete.

Businesses should review their employment contracts in light of this position.

Educational content, not legal advice for your specific matter.

Quartz Legal Associates | www.quartzlegalassociates.in

A common scenario in property and commercial deals: you have paid most of the price, the other side asks for more time a...
01/10/2026

A common scenario in property and commercial deals: you have paid most of the price, the other side asks for more time and then more money, and by the time you send a legal notice the contractual period has passed. Does that sink your claim for specific performance?

In A. Shahul Hameed v. N. Malligarjuna (2026 INSC 573), decided in May 2026, the Supreme Court said a late notice does not, by itself, mean the buyer was not ready and willing. Under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, courts look at the overall conduct of the parties before and after the suit. On the reported facts, the buyer had paid about 93% of the price, approached the sellers within the agreed period and filed suit within limitation.

For businesses, the practical point is simple: keep dated records of payments, requests to complete and refusals. Every case turns on its own facts.

This is general legal information, not advice on any specific matter.

Quartz Legal Associates, New Delhi
https://quartzlegalassociates.in

30/09/2026

Agreement पर Stamp Duty पूरी नहीं है…

तो क्या Arbitration खत्म हो जाएगी? ⚖️

Unstamped या insufficiently stamped agreement में Stamp Duty, penalty, admissibility और arbitration proceedings—इन सभी का महत्व हो सकता है.

इस Reel में समझिए कि stamping objection का arbitration proceedings पर क्या असर पड़ सकता है.

⚖️ यह वीडियो केवल general legal information और educational purposes के लिए है। यह किसी specific matter में legal advice नहीं है.

Follow Quartz Legal Associates for practical updates on Commercial Litigation, Arbitration & Contract Law.

CommercialContracts StampDuty SupremeCourt IndianLaw DisputeResolution BusinessLaw LegalAwareness QuartzLegalAssociates

If your commercial contract was never stamped, can the dispute still go to arbitration?The Supreme Court answered this i...
30/09/2026

If your commercial contract was never stamped, can the dispute still go to arbitration?

The Supreme Court answered this in December 2023. A seven-judge Bench held that an unstamped or insufficiently stamped arbitration agreement is not void. It is inadmissible in evidence until the required duty and penalty are paid, and once paid, the defect is cured. The Court also said stamping objections are for the arbitral tribunal, not for the court asked to appoint an arbitrator or refer the parties (In Re: Interplay between Arbitration Agreements and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, 2023 INSC 1066, decided 13 December 2023).

In practice, a missing stamp should no longer hold up the start of an arbitration, but it can still cost time and money if it is raised later. Businesses should check that their key agreements are properly stamped at signing.

Educational content, not legal advice for your specific matter.

Quartz Legal Associates | quartzlegalassociates.in

Your customer handed you a cheque "as security". The payment falls due, you present it, and it is dishonoured. Is that o...
29/09/2026

Your customer handed you a cheque "as security". The payment falls due, you present it, and it is dishonoured. Is that only a civil dispute, or can Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 apply?

The Supreme Court considered this in Sripati Singh v. State of Jharkhand (28 October 2021). It held that a cheque issued as security in a financial transaction does not automatically fall outside Section 138. Once the underlying debt has become due and payable, the cheque can be presented, and if it bounces, the section can be attracted.

The drawer is not left without a defence: the question is whether a debt was due when the cheque was presented. If the dues had already been repaid, that is something to be established at trial.

For businesses, the practical points are simple. If you hold a security cheque, present it only once the amount is genuinely due, and follow the notice timelines strictly. If you have issued one, retrieve or cancel it when the debt is discharged, and keep written proof.

Businesses should review how they take, hold and release security cheques in their commercial arrangements.

Educational content, not legal advice for your specific matter.

Quartz Legal Associates, New Delhi
www.quartzlegalassociates.in

Ending a long-running agency or sole-selling arrangement that was never put in writing? Many businesses assume that with...
27/09/2026

Ending a long-running agency or sole-selling arrangement that was never put in writing? Many businesses assume that without a signed term, they can walk away without notice. A dispute decided by the Madras High Court shows why that assumption is risky.

The case had two rounds. The trial court initially held that reasonable notice under Section 206 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was owed only where the parties had agreed on a fixed period for the agency (as described in Section 205) — since this arrangement had none, no notice was required (Bright Brothers (Private) Ltd. v. J.K. Sayani, AIR 1976 Mad 55). On appeal, a Division Bench reversed this, holding that reasonable notice must be given before ending an agency regardless of whether a term was ever fixed, and awarded three months' commission as compensation (reported as AIR 1980 Mad 162).

The takeaway for businesses: the absence of a written term does not by itself mean termination is free of obligation. This is Madras High Court authority, so treat it as persuasive rather than binding outside that jurisdiction — and always check your own agreement for a notice or termination clause first. Where an arrangement is undocumented, factor a reasonable notice period, or its cost, into any exit plan.

Read the full breakdown in today's carousel.

Many founders assume that once a company's debts are restructured through insolvency, their personal guarantee is restru...
26/09/2026

Many founders assume that once a company's debts are restructured through insolvency, their personal guarantee is restructured along with it. It isn't.

The Supreme Court settled this question in Lalit Kumar Jain v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 321 (21 May 2021): approving a resolution plan for the company does not, on its own, discharge the personal guarantor. Because a guarantee is an independent contract, Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 keeps the guarantor's liability co-extensive with the company's, unless the guarantee itself says otherwise — and lenders can pursue the guarantor separately through the NCLT.

If you've personally guaranteed a company loan, that guarantee should be tracked and managed independently of the company's own financial position, not treated as an extension of it.

Educational content, not legal advice for your specific matter.

"They admitted they owe us something — doesn't that mean we can still recover the whole amount?" It's a question we hear...
25/09/2026

"They admitted they owe us something — doesn't that mean we can still recover the whole amount?" It's a question we hear often from businesses trying to recover old dues.

Under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, a written acknowledgment of a debt — made before the limitation period expires — gives the creditor a fresh limitation period. But that fresh period only covers the liability actually acknowledged.

The Supreme Court confirmed this in M/S. Airen and Associates v. M/S. Sanmar Engineering Services Limited (Civil Appeal No. 654 of 2015, reported 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 745). A contractor's claim of ₹3,07,115.85 was met with a letter admitting only ₹27,874.10. The Court held that only the admitted amount got the benefit of a fresh limitation period — the disputed balance remained time-barred, applying the long-standing principle from J.C. Budhraja v. Chairman, Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd., (2008) 2 SCC 444.

The takeaway for any business recovering commercial dues: don't treat a partial admission as a guarantee that your entire claim is protected. Review exactly what was acknowledged, and act before the rest of the claim runs out of time.

Companies relying on an old written acknowledgment to preserve a stale claim should have its exact scope reviewed by counsel.

If your company is involved in a commercial suit, you may not have to wait years for a full trial to get a decision.The ...
24/09/2026

If your company is involved in a commercial suit, you may not have to wait years for a full trial to get a decision.

The Supreme Court recently clarified when a commercial court can decide a case without one — through Order XIII-A of the Civil Procedure Code, a summary-judgment mechanism created specifically for commercial disputes.

In a case decided on 29 April 2026 (Reliance Eminent Trading and Commercial Private Limited v. Delhi Development Authority, 2026 INSC 436), the Delhi Development Authority tried to send a ₹164.91 crore refund claim to a full trial by raising questions about possession and limitation. The Supreme Court held that once the underlying land acquisition had conclusively lapsed, those defences were legally irrelevant — and decided the case on the existing pleadings.

The Court set out nine guiding principles for when this route is available: courts should reject defences that are merely "fanciful," resolve short points of law without extended proceedings, and reserve a full trial for disputes that genuinely require oral evidence and credibility findings.

Companies involved in commercial litigation — as either plaintiff or defendant — should consider early in the case whether it truly depends on disputed facts, or whether it could be resolved faster through a summary judgment application.

Address

A-117, 2nd Floor, Lajpat Nagar-1, New Delhi
Delhi
110024

Opening Hours

Monday 10am - 7pm
Tuesday 10am - 7pm
Wednesday 10am - 7pm
Thursday 10am - 7pm
Friday 10am - 7pm
Saturday 10am - 7pm

Telephone

7676909742

Website

, ,

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Quartz Legal Associates posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Quartz Legal Associates:

Shortcuts

Share

Category