Search Results for "shelters"

105 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 105 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Disabled Person's Petition for Shop License on Encroached Water Body. Disability Certificate Does Not Confer Right to Encroach on Public Property or Water Body.

The petitioner, A.Chinnaraja, claiming to be a disabled person, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madura...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Examines Ineligibility of Retired CPWD Officers as Arbitrators under Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act. Appointment of Retired Additional Director General of CPWD as Arbitrator Without Contractor's Consent Violates Seventh Schedule and Mandates Express Agreement Post-Dispute.

The petitioner, a construction company, entered into six separate agreements with the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) for various construction ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appointment of Independent Arbitrator in Municipal Contract Dispute — Commissioner Disqualified Due to Justifiable Bias. Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 invoked as named arbitrator was a party to the agreement.

The petitioner, Solutions Advertising, entered into an agreement with the Thane Municipal Corporation on 19 September 2008 to construct 298 bus shelte...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Developer's Challenge to SRA Order in Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. CEO's Direction to Process Letter of Intent Upheld as 70% Consent of Eligible Members Was Validly Obtained Under DCR 33(10).

The case involves a slum rehabilitation scheme under DCR 33(10) of the Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai. The petitioners, Lokhandwal...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...