Search Results for "Stamp duty refund"

288 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 288 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Third Party Claim in Execution Proceedings — ING Bank N.V. Fails to Prove Ownership of Attached Flat. Claim under Section 47 CPC and Order XXI Rules 58 and 64 rejected as bank did not establish that the flat was not owned by judgment debtor.

The case involves a Chamber Summons taken out by ING Bank N.V., a third party, under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rules 58 and 64 of the Code of Civ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Quashes FIR Against Landowners in Cheating Case, Holds Civil Dispute Not Criminal. FIR Quashed as Civil Suit for Specific Performance Already Pending; No Criminal Intent Found Under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.

The dispute pertained to an agricultural land transaction where the accused persons had entered into a notarized agreement to sell dated 10th March 20...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Considers Second Appeals in RERA Delayed Possession Matter. Builder Challenges Appellate Tribunal's Direction to Pay Interest at 10.05% p.a. from February 2014.

These Second Appeals were filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay by Runwal Constructions, a registered partnership firm, challenging the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Development Charge Levy in Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act. The court held that the levy is a fee for services rendered and not a tax, and the amendment is within legislative competence.

The petitioners, The Solapur Promoters and Builders Association Society and another, challenged the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Regiona...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Specific Performance of Development Agreement in Favor of Purchasers. Agreement for Development Treated as Agreement for Sale Under Specific Relief Act, 1963 as Essential Terms Constitute Sale of Immovable Property.

The appellants, original defendants, were the owners of a property in Pune. They executed a development agreement dated 18th October 2007 in favor of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Reserves Decision on Quashing of Multiple FIRs in Real Estate Dispute; Developers Contend Breach of Contract, Not Cheating. Court Examines Whether Civil Dispute Can Attract Criminal Liability Under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The Karnataka High Court heard a batch of criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of mult...