IJCOPE Journal

UGC Logo DOI / ISO Logo

International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management

A Peer-Reviewed, Open-Access International Journal Supporting Multidisciplinary Research, Digital Publishing Standards, DOI Registration, and Academic Indexing.
Journal Information
ISSN: 3108-1754 (Online)
Crossref DOI: Available
ISO Certification: 9001:2015
Publication Fee: 599/- INR
Compliance: UGC Journal Norms
License: CC BY 4.0
Peer Review: Double Blind
Volume 02, Issue 7

Published on: July 2026

TRADE SECRET PROTECTION IN INDIA: AN ANALYSIS OF AGREEMENTS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE AND THE JUDICIAL EVOLUTION OF SECTION 27 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872

DHEERAJ K P

Dr. SHOBHA YADAV

AMITY UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
DOI:https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i7.013

Article Status

Plagiarism Passed Peer Reviewed Open Access

Available Documents

Download PDF Review Report

Abstract

Trade secret protection has become a central issue in modern intellectual property law because competitive advantage in contemporary commerce often depends less on tangible assets and more on information, know-how, and confidential business strategy. In India, however, the protection of trade secrets has historically developed through contract law, equity, and judicial intervention rather than through a dedicated statute. Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 occupies the doctrinal center of this field by rendering agreements in restraint of trade void, subject to limited exceptions. This article examines the relationship between trade secret protection and agreements in restraint of trade, focusing on the judicial evolution of Section 27 and the extent to which Indian courts have balanced employee mobility against proprietary business interests. Drawing from the uploaded document’s discussion of leading Indian and comparative cases, the article argues that Indian law has consistently protected confidentiality and during-employment obligations but remains deeply suspicious of post-employment restraints such as non-compete clauses. The article concludes that while the present doctrine preserves freedom of occupation, it is insufficient for the modern knowledge economy and should be supplemented by a dedicated trade secrets framework.

Keywords: Trade secrets; Section 27; restraint of trade; non-compete clause; non-disclosure agreement; non-solicitation; confidentiality; Indian Contract Act, 1872; employee mobility; trade secret law.

How to Cite this Paper

P, D. K. (2026). Trade Secret Protection in India: An Analysis of Agreements in Restraint of Trade and the Judicial Evolution of Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management, <i>02</i>(7). https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i7.013

P, DHEERAJ. "Trade Secret Protection in India: An Analysis of Agreements in Restraint of Trade and the Judicial Evolution of Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872." International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management, vol. 02, no. 7, 2026, pp. . doi:https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i7.013.

P, DHEERAJ. "Trade Secret Protection in India: An Analysis of Agreements in Restraint of Trade and the Judicial Evolution of Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872." International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management 02, no. 7 (2026). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55041/ijcope.v2i7.013.

Search & Index

Google Scholar Crossref DOI ResearchGate

References


  1. Express Bank Ltd. v. Priya Puri, (2006) III L.L.J. 540 (Del.).

  2. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Mehar Karan Singh, Suit No. 3313 of 2008, ¶ 62 (Bom. H.C. Aug. 24, 2010).

  3. Burlington Home Shopping (P) Ltd. v. Rajnish Chibber, 61 (1995) D.L.T. 6 (Del. H.C.).

  4. Escorts Constr. Equip. Ltd. v. Action Constr. Equip. (P) Ltd., MANU/DE/0185/1999 (Del. H.C. Oct. 16, 1998).

  5. Faccenda Chicken Ltd. v. Fowler, Ch. 117 (C.A.).

  6. Fisk, C. L. (2001). Working knowledge: Trade secrets, restrictive covenants in employment, and the rise of corporate intellectual property, 1800–1920. Hastings Law Journal, 52, 493–555.

  7. India Code. (n.d.). Section 27 - Indian Contract Act, 1872.

  8. News Serv. (P) Ltd. v. Anurag Muskaan, 2013 Indlaw Del. 873, para. 26 (Del. H.C.).

  9. John Richard Brady v. Chemical Process Equipments (P) Ltd., A.I.R. 1987 Del. 372.

  10. Keeler v. Taylor, 53 Pa. 467 (1866).

  11. Krishnamachari, V., & Gogia, S. K. (2017). Law of contracts I & II. Narender Gogia & Company.

  12. Krishan Murgai v. Superintendence Co. of India (P) Ltd., A.I.R. 1979 Del. 232, para. 9.

  13. Law Commission of India. (1958). Thirteenth Report on the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (para. 55).

  14. Madhub Chunder v. Rajcoomar Doss, (1874) 14 Beng. L.R. 76, 85–86.

  15. Mitchel v. Reynolds, I.P.Wms. 181, 24 Eng. Rep. 347 (Q.B. 1711).

  16. Mulla, S. D. F. (2015). Mulla: The Indian Contract Act (14th ed., 2nd reprint).

Ethical Compliance & Review Process

  • •All submissions are screened under plagiarism detection.
  • •Review follows editorial policy.
  • •Authors retain copyright.
  • •Peer Review Type: Double-Blind Peer Review
  • •Published on: Jul 03 2026
CCBYNC

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. You are free to share and adapt this work for non-commercial purposes with proper attribution.

View License
Back to Volume 02, Issue 7View All Issues Next Article

← Previous Article

Topological Analysis of HIV/AIDS Drugs Using Graph Theory, Linear Regression Models, and Predictive Machine Learning Suites

Next Article →

Trade Situation in Turbulent Time of 2025: India’s Economic Outlook in a Volatile World
Scroll to Top