Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

august 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-08-26

MOGLI LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs RELIANCE STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation / case number
ARB.P.-1845/2024 2025:DHC:7751
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
MOGLI LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent
RELIANCE STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

$~O-4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 1845/2024 & I.A. 20596/2025 Date of Decision: 26.08.2025 IN THE MATTER OF: MOGLI LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarun Verma, Ms. Komal Gupta and Ms. Arzoo Singh, Advs. versus RELIANCE STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) 1. It is stated that the earlier counsel who was appearing for the respondent has complied with the provisions of Chapter V Rule 5 of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018 and served the notice of discharge to its client. Despite the aforesaid, none appears for the respondent. 2. Under these circumstances, the Court proceeds to hear the petitioner. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and the respondent entered into a formal arrangement in the form of a Distributor Agreement on Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRIYA Signed Signing Date:04.09.2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA 17:53:11 1 KUMAR KAURAV 10.05.2022, whereby the petitioner was appointed as an official channel/distributor partner of the respondent. 4. As per the case of the petitioner, the term of the Distributor Agreement was initially for a period of one year commencing from 01.12.2021 till 30.11.2022, which was to be automatically renewed, unless terminated by either party. 5. The petitioner submits that the role assigned in the Distribution Agreement was efficiently and diligently discharged, and consequent thereto, the petitioner had also made a total advance payment of Rs.. 34,47,565/- to the respondent against certain purchase invoices. The respondent, however, allegedly failed to supply the ordered product, causing reputational and clientele loss to t

MOGLI LABS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs RELIANCE STRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED · Niyam