Search Results for "Coal India Limited"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Incredible Dying Declaration...
Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under Section 182 IPC for Lack of Val...

Search Results for "Coal India Limited"

703 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 703 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Gauhati High Court Decision Striking Down Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004 for Repugnancy with Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Diploma in Medicine and Rural Health Care Held to Be a Medical Qualification Requiring Central Permission Under Section 10A of IMC Act.

10 May 2023

The case involves appeals against the Gauhati High Court's judgment striking down the Assam Rural Health Regulatory Authority Act, 2004. The Assam Act...

High Court

Bombay High Court Adjudicates Challenge to Arbitral Award in Slum Redevelopment Agreement Dispute. Petitioner Seeks Setting Aside of Award Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

13 Sep 2019

...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Land Acquisition for Limestone Quarrying; Declaration Under Section 6(1) of Land Acquisition Act 1894 Held Conclusive Without Proof of Colorable Exercise

16 Sep 1966

The dispute arose from land acquisition proceedings initiated by the State of Uttar Pradesh in 1950 for limestone quarrying. The appellant, Raja Anand...

High Court

High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Dismisses Bank's Revision Against Order Rejecting Application Under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in Recovery Suits — Held That Plaint Discloses Cause of Action and Is Not Barred by Law. The court upheld the trial court's finding that the suits based on invocation of bank guarantees were within limitation and disclosed a cause of action.

5 Jun 2023

The present judgment arises from two Civil Revision Applications filed by the Regional Manager and Assistant General Manager of Union Bank of India (o...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition to Set Aside Arbitral Award in Commercial Dispute Over Coal Handling Services. Court upholds arbitral tribunal's finding that allegations of fraud were not serious enough to render dispute non-arbitrable and rejects challenge to award under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

8 Nov 2023

The case involves a Commercial Arbitration Petition filed by Maharashtra Power Generation Company Ltd. (Petitioner) seeking to set aside an arbitral a...

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Commercial Division, Adjudicates Arbitration Petition Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act — Challenge to Arbitral Award in Indian Premier League Franchise Dispute. Award Directed Payment of Damages and Interest to Franchisee; Petition Alleges Patent Illegality and Excess of Jurisdiction by Arbitrator.

16 Jun 2021

The dispute arose from the termination of a franchise agreement between the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the governing body for crick...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Hears Section 34 Petition Concerning Forfeiture of Bid Securities in Tender Process. The Petition Questions Whether the Arbitrator Correctly Interpreted Clause 19.6 of the Tender Instructions and the Law on Bank Guarantees.

4 Feb 2015

The dispute arose out of a tender process floated by the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited for supply, construction, and comm...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Hears Batch of Writ Petitions Challenging Late Filing Fee Under Section 234E of Income Tax Act. Petitioners Seek Declaration that Section 234E is Unconstitutional and Violative of Articles 14, 265, and 277.

12 Jun 2015

This batch of writ petitions was filed before the High Court of Karnataka under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the cons...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Central Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

18 19 20 21 22

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)