“I was dissatisfied with their service and as the term of contract ended, I didn’t wish to continue further. So I terminated the contract,” said Indian cricketer Virat Kohli on the dispute over a contract that Nike India Pvt Ltd, multi-national sportswear and equipment company, entered with him, says a report in The New Indian Express.
He said, “I asked for a pair of shoes from Nike as I was their brand ambassador. But they didn’t oblige. After six months they sent me a pair of shoes but both were for the right foot.”
Udaya Holla, Senior Counsel representing Kohli, submitted that Kohli had undergone a lot of mental agony during the contract with Nike. “They have to give him `20 lakh as per the agreement but they didn’t. They did this to Zaheer Khan also. The contract has ended and there is no violation,” he said.
Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh, hearing both the parties, dismissed Nike’s appeal and said the termination of the contract is in accordance with law.
According to a report in Deccan Herald, upholding the termination of his contract with Nike by Virat Kohli, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday disposed of the petition filed by the former, seeking to restrain the cricketer from signing an agreement with a third party.
“Justice Hulavadi G Ramesh, who heard the petition filed by Nike India Private Limited (NIPL), said Kohli’s termination of the contract was in accordance with the law. He also rejected an interlocutory application by NIPL seeking to move the apex court,” says the report.
Senior Counsel Udaya Holla, who appeared on behalf of Kohli submitted that there was no violation on part of Kohli and stated that he was not happy with the service of NIPL.
“He had made repeated requests to provide him with shoes about six months ago, to which they did not respond for a long time. When they sent him shoes, they sent a pair of shoes, both of same foot,” he said.
Meanwhile according to a report in Deccan Chronicle, the counsel for NIPL said the allegations were baseless and there was no lacuna in service. Despite the fact that the contract was extended, Kohli was endorsing a rival brand, he argued. Kohli had signed an agreement with NIPL in 2008 and the player had not agreed to an extension of the contract till 2014. According to NIPL, he was about to sign an agreement with a rival brand. Challenging this, NIPL said he cannot sign another agreement when the contract with them was still on and sought to refrain him.