KAHC010159832015_1
15 Dec 2017...
Search Results for "service area"
5298 result(s) found
Found 5298 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Chief Manager Challenging Disciplinary Action for Accepting Forged Bank Guarantee. Reduction in Pay Scale Upheld as Misconduct Proven Under CMC Manual.
6 Feb 2019The petitioner, Rajendraprasad Shukla, was employed as Chief Manager (Finance) at Western Coalfields Limited (WCL), a subsidiary of Coal India Limited...
- 162
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Transfer of Zilla Parishad Teachers to Municipal Corporations on Inclusion of Villages — Vested Right to Absorption Upheld. Teachers serving in villages included in municipal limits are entitled to transfer to the concerned Municipal Corporation under the Government Resolution of July 1999, and the impugned Government Resolution of July 2019 is quashed as it curtails that right.
14 Jun 2024This group of petitions was filed by hundreds of teachers employed with Pune Zilla Parishad, Raigad Zilla Parishad, and Thane Zilla Parishad, seeking ...
- 846
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Co-operative Bank's Auction Sale of Property for Recovery of Dues. Court holds that sale of property by a co-operative bank under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is not a 'sale' under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and does not require registration.
23 Jun 2023The petitioners, who were tenants/licensees of shop premises in a building owned by the respondent co-operative bank, challenged the auction sale of t...
- 54
High Court
Bombay High Court Restrains Construction of Grade Separator Near Protected Monument Under Ancient Monuments Act. Work within 100-meter prohibited area of Pataleshwar Caves requires prior permission from National Monuments Authority under Section 20-A of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
3 Sep 2013The petitioner, Parisar Sanrakshan Sanwardhan Sanstha, filed a public interest litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the constr...
- 122
High Court
Bombay High Court Hears Appeal Against Dismissal of Notice of Motion in MOFA-MMRDA Dispute. Flat Purchasers Claimed MOFA Rights on Land Owned by MMRDA and Leased to Developer, Which Respondents Disputed as Excluded Under MMRDA Act.
17 Mar 2022This appeal before the Bombay High Court arose from the dismissal of a Notice of Motion by a learned Single Judge in a suit concerning a plot of land ...
- 29
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Defence Land Claim Over Leasehold Property. Petitioner's Title Not Established Against Union of India's Claim of Ownership Over Land Leased to Colaba Land & Mill Company.
19 Dec 2011The petitioner, TCI Industries Limited, claimed to be a lessee of land admeasuring 10.264 acres in Colaba, Mumbai, by virtue of an Indenture of Assign...
- 140
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds High Court Judgment Directing Shift of Toll Plaza for Violation of National Highways Fee Rules. Construction at 194 km of NH30 Found to Violate Rule 8 of National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 Due to Lack of Written Reasons and Failure to Meet Conditions for Municipal Area Placement.
23 Sep 2021The dispute arose from a writ petition filed by respondents 1 to 17 (writ petitioners) seeking to restrain the construction of a toll plaza at 194 km ...
- 317
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Landlord's Challenge to Cancellation of NOC for Redevelopment Due to Misrepresentation of Tenant Status. Landlord's Failure to Disclose Correct Residential Status of Tenants Renders Permission Void Ab Initio Under DCR 33(7) and MHADA Act.
21 Aug 2012The petitioners, Dahyabhai Papers & Boards Pvt. Ltd. and another, owned a dilapidated cessed building in Mumbai. They applied for redevelopment under ...
- 132
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Franchisee's Section 9 Petition for Interim Relief in Franchise Dispute. Court holds that arbitration clause providing for three arbitrators with franchisor appointing one arbitrator is valid and not unconscionable, and that Section 9 petition is not maintainable as the arbitration agreement provides for a specific mechanism for appointment of arbitrators.
13 Feb 2012The petitioner, Karan Sahgal, a franchisee, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking interim relief agai...
- 146
