KAHC010822332025_1
8 Jul 2026The Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka heard two intra-court writ appeals filed by M/s MP24 Construction Company, the lead member of a cons...
Search Results for "supplemental agreement"
218 result(s) found
Found 218 result(s)
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in BDA Site Allotment Dispute — Directs Execution of Sale Deeds Within Four Weeks. Appellant's Right to Specific Performance Upheld Despite Lapse of Time as BDA Had Accepted Full Consideration and Issued Possession Certificate.
24 Jul 2025The appellant, Manjushri Kabra, filed a writ appeal against an order dated 15.01.2025 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.10696/2023. The appel...
- 38
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows SEBI's Appeal Against Interim Order Restraining Adjudication Proceedings. Civil Suit Against SEBI Held Not Maintainable Due to Alternative Remedy Under SEBI Act, 1992.
21 Mar 2022The case involves an appeal by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against an interim order passed by a Single Judge of the Bombay High ...
- 45
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Retrospective Demand of Market Fee and DPC Under Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing Act. Market Committee Cannot Levy Fee on Transactions Prior to Notification of Market Area Under Sections 26 and 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963.
29 Jul 2019The petitioner, M/s. Arasa Hotels Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court challen...
- 133
High Court
Bombay High Court Quashes Bank's Wilful Defaulter Declaration for Violating Natural Justice. Show-cause notice lacking specific grounds renders the decision invalid under RBI Master Circular on Wilful Defaulters.
17 Jul 2019The petitioners, Nitin Shah, Rahul Shah, and Kunal Shah, who were directors of Nitin Fire Protection Industries Ltd. (the corporate debtor under CIRP)...
- 145
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Order Refusing Interim Relief in Share Dispute — No Prima Facie Case for Injunction Against EGM and Share Transfer. Court held that balance of convenience did not favour restraining the holding company from exercising its voting rights and that the appellants failed to establish a strong prima facie case for the relief sought.
13 Feb 2019The case involves a dispute between the appellants (Ravi Arya, Nakul Arya, Sushma Arya, Varun Arya, and Ravi Arya HUF) and the respondents, including ...
- 120
High Court
Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitral Award in Loan Recovery Dispute — Time Limit for Award Held Directory. Petitioner's Objection to Arbitrator's Jurisdiction Waived Due to Participation Without Timely Objection.
1 Oct 2010The petitioner, B.K. Gopakumar, a film producer, entered into a loan agreement dated 10 November 1992 with the respondent, National Film Development C...
- 44
High Court
Bombay High Court Restrains Government from Terminating Salt Land Lease Without Proper Notice and Hearing. Lease Termination Order Set Aside for Violation of Principles of Natural Justice and Non-Compliance with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
5 Jun 2006The plaintiff, Vikas Kamalakar Walawalkar, filed a suit seeking a declaration that the termination of lease/grant of salt land by the Deputy Salt Comm...
- 88
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Implementation. Court upholds eligibility determination and authorization of developer under Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, 1971.
11 Mar 2005The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash proceedings leading to implementation of a Slum ...
- 175
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Share Dispute Case — Upholds Trial Court's Refusal of Interim Injunction. Court held that the appellants failed to establish a prima facie case for restraining the pledge of shares, as the shares were not proved to be held in a fiduciary capacity.
30 Nov -0001The case involves a dispute between two branches of the Arya family over shares of Arya Iron & Steel Co. Pvt. Ltd. The appellants, Ravi Arya and other...
- 78
