Mukesh is running a grocery store in Delhi. He sells his grocery business, including goodwill worth `1,00,000 to Rohit for a sum of ` 5,00,000. After the sale of goodwill, Rohit made an agreement with Mukesh. As per this agreement, Mukesh cannot open another grocery store (similar kind of business) in the whole of India for next ten years. However, Mukesh opens another store in the same city two months later. What are the rights available with Rohit regarding the restriction imposed on Mukesh with reference to Indian Contract Act, 1872?

According to Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, any agreement that restrains a person from carrying on a lawful trade, profession or business is a void agreement. However, there are certain exceptions to this rule. One of the statutory exceptions includes sale of Goodwill. The restraint as to sale of goodwill would be a valid restraint provided- i) Where the restraint is to refrain from carrying on a similar business, ii) The restrain should be within the specified local limits, iii) The restraint should be not to carry on the similar business after sale of goodwill to the buyer for a price, iv) The restriction should be reasonable. Reasonableness of restriction will depend upon number of factors as considered by court. In the given case, Mukesh has sold the goodwill and there is restraint for not carrying on the same business of grocery store. However, the restriction imposed on Mukesh is unreasonable as he cannot carry similar business in whole of India for next 10 years. The restriction on restraint to similar kind of trade should be reasonable to make it a valid agreement. Hence, Rohit cannot take any legal action against Mukesh as the restriction is unreasonable as per Section 27 of Indian Contract Act, 1872. Hence, the agreement made between in restraint of trade between Mukesh and Rohit is void agreement.