EXIDE PAKISTAN LIMITED THROUGH FINANCE DIRECTOR AND COMPANY SECRETARY versus MALIK ABDUL WADOOD
Section 54 and 57 Contract Act (IX of 1872), Section 27 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O XXXX, Rr 1 and 2 Interim injunction, approval of the ban agreement The plaintiff was a manufacturing company and the defendant was its former The employee was seeking the plaintiff's injunction against the defendant on the ground that the plaintiff had contracted with the plaintiff not to work for a period of two years, once he left the job. It was that while working with the plaintiff, the defendants had obtained confidential information that the pledge of validity between the parties was very ambiguous, generalized and therefore due. The agreement did not specify what specific information the defendant was exposed to, which would prevent him from using the employer directly or indirectly in employment with another employer. Cannot define as. What confidential information was obtained by the plaintiff because the plaintiff failed to refuse o About whether the defendant specifically obtained any trade secret or secret formula or information, as compared to his usual employment position. What was, therefore, a denial of the interim injunction in that case
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
