The Redistribution Stockist shall purchase and accept from the Company such stock as the Company shall at its discretion send to the Redistribution Stockist for fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement.
In order to ensure equitable and reasonable distribution of stocks at fair prices, the Redistribution Stockist shall number rebook or in any way companyvey, transport or despatch parts of stocks of the products received by him outside the aforesaid town except when he is so expressly directed in writing by the Company.
From the Judgment and Order dated the 17th March, 1976 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commis sion, New Delhi in R.T.P. Enquiry No.
The practice of area allocation to which clause 9 of the Agreement Exhibit F related, shall be discontinued and shall number be repeated.
Clause 5 of the Agreement Exhib it F shall stand modified so that the follow ing shall be substituted in place thereof The Redistribution Stockists shall use his best endeavours to maintain and in crease the trade of the products in the said town and for this purpose he shah at all times keep and maintain adequate stocks of the products in all its packings and he shall carry out the instructions and directions including those as to maximum resale price which may from time to time be given by the Company or by the Companys accredited repre sentatives in respect of the sale or resale or disposal by the Redistribution Stockist of stocks of the products supplied to him in pursuance of this Agreement.
The practices of resale price maintenance and full line forcing to which original clause 5 of the agreement related, shall be discontinued and shall number be repeat ed.
On or before the said date, the Respondents shall intimate all Redistribution Stockists of the modifica tions in Clauses 5 of the Agreement Exhibit F and the voidity of clause 9 of the Agree ment Exhibit F .
The agreement has 23 terms or clauses in it.
General, B. Datta and Girish Chandra for Respondents Nos.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The informant was a redistribution stockist of the appellant companypany carrying on business regulated by the terms of an agreement, known as the redistribution stockists agreement of the companypany, found in a standard printed form, entered into with each stockist.
Clause 9 of the Agreement Exhibit F shall be void.
A. Shah and N. Nettar for Respondent No.
The Redistribu tion Stockist is prohibited from charging in excess of the maximum resale prices stipulated by the Company, but he may, at his discretion, charge prices lower than the said maximum resale prices.
M. Singhvi, Ravinder Narain, Talat Ansari and Shri Narain for the Appellant.
The Redistribu tion Stockist is prohibited from charging in excess of the maximum resale prices stipulated by the Company but he may at his discretion charge prices lower than the said maximum resale prices.
680 of 1976.
This order shall companye into force with effect from 1st July, 1976.
In all future price circulars or lists to be issued by the Respondents, it shall be clearly stated that the prices there in mentioned are maximum prices and that prices lower than these prices may be charged.
out all instructions and directions including those as to the maximum resale price which may from time to time be given by the Company or by the Companys accredited repre sentatives in respect of the sale or resale or disposal by the Redistribution Stockist of stocks of the Products supplied to him in pursuance of this Agreement.
1 and 2.
The clauses companyplained of are 5 and 9, which may be reproduced here The Redistribution Stockist shall use his best endeavours to maintain and in crease the trade of the Products in the said town and for this purpose he shall at all times keep and maintain adequate stocks of the Products in all its packings and he shall carry.
13 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by J. This is an appeal under section 55 of the Monop olies Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 hereinafter referred to as the Act against the order and judgment of the Monopolies Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, New Delhi hereinafter referred to as the Commission , in proceedings started under section 10 a iv of the Act against the appellant M s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Company , upon information furnished by Bhogilal Manilal Shah of M s. Shah Manilal Motichand Sons of Poona hereinafter referred to as the informant .
The Commission had accepted the case brought to its numberice by the informant and made the following order 1 .
11 of 1974.
to do for purposes of resale on his behalf by the Companys employee.
N. Sinha, Sol.
He shall also whenev er so required by the Company make available from the stocks of Companys merchandise purchased by him such part as the Company directs him.
