Search Results for "Rule 137"

1266 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1266 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Quashing of Recovery Notice. Employer Cannot Recover Differential Pay After 25 Years Due to Its Own Mistake in Granting Exemption from Departmental Examination.

The petitioner, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Industrial Court Order Quashing Recovery Notice Against Employee. Recovery of Differential Pay After 25 Years Due to Employer's Mistake Held Unfair Labour Practice Under MRTU & PULP Act.

The petitioner, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

NCLAT Dismisses Appeal Against Rejection of Section 9 Application Due to Pre-existing Dispute and Limitation. Operational Creditor's claim for work done under contract held to be time-barred and disputed, warranting dismissal under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

The appeal arises from the dismissal of a Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) by the National Company Law Tribu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

NCLAT Dismisses Appeal Against Rejection of CIRP Petition Due to Settlement Agreement - Mediated Settlement Bars Insolvency Proceedings Under Section 61 of IBC, 2016

The appeal was filed by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, a financial creditor, under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against an order da...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Section 479(2) of MMC Act, 1888 — License Fee Fixation by Commissioner Upheld. The court held that the power to fix fees is not unguided and does not violate Articles 14 or 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

The petitioners, Rushabh Outdoors (a partnership firm) and Vandana Borse (proprietress of M/s. Synnovation), challenged the constitutional validity of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Challenge to GST Notification Extending Time Limit for Show Cause Notice. Notification No. 09/2023 held valid under Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017 as a legislative act not amenable to certiorari.

The petitioner, M/s Sahaj Construction, a registered dealer under the GST laws, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution o...