Search Results for "foreign property"

1056 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1056 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order — Agricultural Land Acquired Prior to Detention Exempt from Forfeiture. Property acquired before the 'illegal' period under Section 2(2)(b) of SAFEMA cannot be forfeited; appellate authority's order partly confirmed.

The petitioner, Ranchhodbhai Bhagwanbhai Tandel (since deceased, through his legal heir Naresh Ranchhodbhai Tandel), filed a criminal writ petition un...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding-Up Petition as Foreign Company Failed to Comply with Registration Requirements Under Sections 592 and 599 of Companies Act, 1956. Petitioner, a foreign company with a place of business in India, cannot maintain a winding-up petition without registering under the Act.

The petitioner, Willis Europe B.V., a company incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands with its principal place of business in the United Kingdo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Forfeiture of Property Under SAFEMA Despite Revocation of Detention Order. Property of Detenu Forfeited Under Sections 7 and 19(1) of SAFEMA Upheld as Detention Order Was Valid When Forfeiture Order Was Passed.

The petitioner, Smt. Padma Nirmal Agarwal, challenged the forfeiture of a flat (Flat No.16, 471/C, Manu Mahal, King's Circle, Mumbai) under the Smuggl...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Forfeiture of Properties under SAFEMA. Detention Order Under COFEPOSA Validly Triggers SAFEMA Proceedings Despite Non-Execution of Detention and Redemption of Confiscated Currency.

The petitioner, Smt. Yamini S. Bhagwanji, challenged the forfeiture of three immovable properties and certain bank accounts under the Smugglers and Fo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Reviews Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award Under Section 48 of Arbitration Act. Challenges to Award Based on Public Policy and Lack of Notice Were Dismissed by Executing Court.

The respondent, a Korean company, chartered a vessel to the petitioner, an Indian firm, under a Charter Party dated 12.05.2004. Disputes arose over fr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Decides on the Validity of Arbitral Award Covering Foreign Immoveable Properties Excluded from Preliminary Decree in a Partition Suit. Construction of Reference to Arbitration under Section 21 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 Clarified.

The dispute arose from a partition suit filed by the respondent, Subramaniam Chettiar, against his brother, Nachiappa Chettiar, and his sons (appellan...