Understanding Negative Covenants Under Indian Law: Judicial Enforcement and Legal Boundaries

Basic Concept of Negative Covenant

A negative covenant, also known as a restrictive covenant, is a contractual provision that restricts one party from carrying out certain specified actions. These covenants may involve some form of compensation to the party that consents to the restriction. Negative covenants are commonly found in employment contracts, mergers and acquisitions, bond documents, and land use agreements.

Legal Framework Under Indian Law

Section 27 of Indian Contract Act, 1872

The enforceability of negative covenants in India is primarily governed by Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which declares agreements in restraint of trade as void. The provision aims to prevent any agreement that restricts a person from engaging in trade, business, or lawful profession.

Judicial Interpretation

The Supreme Court in Niranjan Shankar Golikari v. The Century Spinning and Manufacturing Company Ltd established that negative covenants can be valid as long as the restriction imposed is reasonable and not against public policy. The court made a crucial distinction between restrictions operative during employment and those after termination of the contract.

Court's Power to Grant Relief

During Contract Period

Courts can grant injunctive relief to enforce negative covenants under specific circumstances:

• Valid During Employment: Negative covenants operative during the period of employment are generally not regarded as restraint of trade and therefore do not fall under the ambit of Section 27 of the Contract Act

• Injunction Under Section 42: Courts can grant injunctions to enforce negative covenants under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, provided the contract is subsisting and the party seeking injunction is complying with their contractual obligations

Post-Contract Period

The enforceability becomes more restrictive after contract termination:

• Limited Enforcement: Negative covenants can only be enforced during the existence of the contract and not after its termination

• Restraint of Trade Concerns: Post-employment non-compete obligations are heavily scrutinized as they are seen as attempts to secure freedom from competition from individuals no longer bound by the contract

Conditions for Granting Relief

Courts consider several factors before granting injunctive relief:

• The contract must be subsisting at the time the injunction is sought

• The party seeking relief must be complying with their own contractual obligations

• The restriction must be reasonable and not render the other party idle

• Courts cannot grant injunctions that would indirectly compel performance of positive covenants in non-specifically enforceable contracts

Exceptions and Special Cases

Sale of Goodwill: The Act specifically exempts agreements not to carry on business when goodwill is sold from the purview of Section 27. Courts have upheld such negative covenants as valid exceptions to the general rule against restraint of trade.

Confidentiality and Trade Secrets: Recent judicial precedents indicate that negative covenants protecting confidential information and trade secrets are enforceable and do not violate Section 27, particularly when they involve sensitive business information shared during the contract period.

Conclusion

While courts can grant relief for negative covenants, the scope is limited and highly dependent on the specific circumstances. The key principle is that such relief is generally available during the contract period but becomes significantly restricted after termination, with courts maintaining a balance between contractual freedom and preventing unreasonable restraints on trade and livelihood.

Print Page