Search Results for "Procedural illegality"

988 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 988 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Hears Appeal Against Order in Execution Proceedings; Permits Power of Attorney Holder to Argue. Execution of Decree for Possession in Specific Performance Suit Involves Third Party Rights.

This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent read with Order XXI Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenged the order of a learned...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Assessment Order in Transfer Pricing Case for Violation of Natural Justice — Failure to Provide Show-Cause Notice and Opportunity of Hearing Renders Order Invalid. Petitioner's Objections to Draft Assessment Order Not Considered, Violating Section 144C of Income Tax Act, 1961.

The petitioner, SHL (India) Private Limited, an Indian company and part of the SHL Group, United Kingdom, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Private Complaints for Dishonour of Cheque Over Rs. 1 Crore Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Section 142(2) of NI Act Does Not Mandate Police Investigation, Private Complaint Maintainable.

The case involved a reference made by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court regarding the interpretation of Section 142(2) of the Negotiable...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Declares Demolition of Shop without Notice Illegal under Section 23 of Karnataka State Highways Act, 1964. Tenant's Possession Protected When Authorities Demolish Building Without Following Procedural Mandate.

The petitioner was a tenant running a textile shop in a building at Magadi Town, measuring 19 feet by 76 feet, referred to as Schedule-B property. He ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal, Restores Arbitral Award in Contractor vs. Irrigation Corporation Dispute. Court Holds That Section 34 Court Exceeded Its Jurisdiction by Reappreciating Evidence and Setting Aside Award on Grounds Not Permitted Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The present Commercial Arbitration Appeal was filed by M/s. Shinde & Sons, a contractor, under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 199...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Holds Respondents in Contempt for Breach of Injunction Order. Resolutions Increasing Authorised Capital and Alloting Shares While Restrained from Exercising Rights on Shares Amount to Wilful Disobedience.

The appeal arose from Suit No.3121 of 2004, where the appellants (original plaintiffs, Gopal L. Raheja & Anr.) claimed that the respondents (original ...