Search Results for "privity"

433 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 433 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Application for Rejection of Plaint in Specific Performance Suit — Cause of Action Disclosed. Court holds that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if it discloses a cause of action, even if the claim may ultimately fail on merits.

The judgment pertains to a Notice of Motion filed by defendant No.1 in a suit for specific performance. The defendant sought rejection of the plaint u...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Bank's Petition in Guarantee Dispute Due to Lack of Privity of Contract. Guarantee Agreement Held Unenforceable as Principal Debtor Was Not a Party to the Contract Under Indian Contract Act, 1872.

The petitioner, Dena Bank, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dated 27.10.2015, which dismiss...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows CIDCO's Appeal Against Quashing of Additional Lease Premium Demand. High Court's Direction to Issue 'No Dues Certificate' Set Aside as Respondent No.3 Failed to Establish Timely Completion of Construction.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by City & Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. (CIDCO) against the order of the Bombay Hi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Dismisses MSEDCL Petition Against Consumer in Unauthorized Use of Electricity Case — Licensee Not Liable for Tariff Violation by Sub-Licensee Without Privity of Contract.

The petitioner, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL), filed a writ petition challenging the order of the appellate authori...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Summary Suit for Recovery of Money — Defendant Granted Leave to Defend as Triable Issues Exist. The court set aside the decree and remanded the matter for trial, holding that the trial court erred in not granting leave to defend under Order 37 Rule 3(6)(a) CPC.

This appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated January 25, 2010 in O.S. No. 15450/2005 passed by the XXVI Addl. City C...