Search Results for "premium fixation"

52 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 52 result(s)

© 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 Quashes KIADB Order Demanding Excess Lease Premium in Industrial Land Allotment — Refund of Rs. 100 Lakhs Ordered with Interest. KIADB Cannot Charge Premium Exceeding Government-Notified Rate Under Section 3(1) of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.

The petitioner, Hadee Forging Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, was allotted 2 acres of industrial land by the Ka...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Revision Application of Lessor in Rent Control Exclusion Case. Company That Lost Rent Control Protection Due to High Paid-Up Share Capital Cannot Regain It by Subsequent Reduction.

The case involves a dispute between M/s. Depe Global Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd. (Plaintiff/Lessor) and M/s. Mather and Platt (India) Ltd. (Defendant/...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Supreme Court of India Resolves Complexities in Taxation of Mineral Rights" "Judgment Clarifies Legislative Powers and the Nature of Royalty in Mining Sector"

The Supreme Court of India addressed a significant dispute regarding the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States, specific...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Rule M-3 of DCPR for Satara Region as Ultra Vires. Rule requiring 12m wide access road for plot subdivision is a valid development control regulation under MRTP Act, 1966 and does not amount to uncompensated acquisition.

The petitioners, Suhas Shridhar Shahane and Subhash Kondiram Sawant, landowners in Satara, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition, Restores Eviction Decree in Sub-Lease Dispute for Breach of Covenant. Failure to pay municipal taxes and insurance premium constituted breach of condition under Section 111(g) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882, justifying forfeiture and eviction.

The petitioner, as lessor, had granted a sub-lease of land and buildings to the first respondent for 98 years. The sub-lease deed contained covenants ...