Search Results for "Section 140 Contract Act"

282 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 282 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Insurance Company's Appeal and Partly Allows Claimants' Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Negligence of Truck Driver Established, Contributory Negligence Not Proved. Claimants awarded enhanced compensation with 6% interest per annum from date of petition.

The judgment arises from two cross-appeals against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangli, dated 28 September 2005 in Claim Petition ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Dispute Over Non-Compete Fee Taxability. Amount Received Under Deed of Covenant Held as Capital Receipt Not Taxable Under Section 28(ii)(a) of Income Tax Act, 1961, Due to Separate Genuine Transaction and Procedural Error in High Court's Judgment.

The appeal concerned the assessment year 1995-96 involving Shri Shiv Raj Gupta, Chairman and Managing Director of Central Distillery and Breweries Ltd...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by Seed Company, Upholds Consumer Status of Small Agriculturist in Buyback Dispute. Cultivation of Safed Musli for Livelihood Held Not Commercial Purpose Under Section 2(d) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

The case involves a dispute between M/s Nandan Biomatrix Ltd., a seed company, and S. Ambika Devi, a small landholder. In 2003, the appellant advertis...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Sets Aside MACT Dismissal for Failure to Prove Negligence. Claimant's evidence of rash driving by respondent motorcyclist found sufficient to establish negligence under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appellant, Mr. Sameer S. Desai, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribun...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding Up Petitions for Non-Compliance with Statutory Notice Under Section 434 of Companies Act, 1956. Statutory notice requirement under Section 434(1)(a) held mandatory and cannot be waived by agreement between parties.

The petitioner, Dolphin Investment Pvt. Ltd., filed two company petitions under Section 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking winding up ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Dismissal of Judgment Debtor's Application to Set Aside Receiver's Sale Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC. Order 21 Rule 89 Held Not Applicable to Receiver Appointed Under Section 51 CPC as Sale Not Conducted Under Order 21.

In execution of a money decree, the judgment debtor defaulted on payment of agreed instalments. The executing court, invoking Section 51 of the Code o...