CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 100 OF 2012
29 Jan 2016...
Search Results for "Limited Liability Partnership"
767 result(s) found
Found 767 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Applications by Partners of Unregistered Firm in Cheque Dishonour Case. Term 'Firm' in Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Includes Unregistered Firm, Allowing Prosecution of Partners for Vicarious Liability.
17 Oct 2023The case involved two criminal revision applications filed by Satheesan Kuttappan and Satyaseelan Kuttappan against P.P. Sudhakaran and the State of M...
- 37
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. High Court Erred in Adopting Hypertechnical Approach to Complaint Averments Under Section 141, as Specific Allegations of Partner's Involvement in Firm Affairs Disclosed Prima Facie Case for Trial.
16 Sep 2022The appeal arose from a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the appellant, a d...
- 245
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding-Up Petition for Unascertained Damages Claim — Lock-in Period License Fee Not a Debt Under Companies Act, 1956. Claim for balance license fee after premature vacation is a claim for damages requiring adjudication, not a debt due and payable under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956.
28 Feb 2014The petitioning-creditor, Indiabulls Properties Pvt. Ltd., filed a winding-up petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, against ...
- 103
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case — Quashing of Complaint Set Aside. Sufficiency of Averments Under Section 141 NI Act for Partner Liability Determined on Holistic Reading of Complaint.
1 Apr 2019The appeal arose from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad which quashed criminal proceedings against the first respondent (a partn...
- 232
High Court
Madras High Court Adjudicated a Commercial Suit for Recovery of Chit Maturity Amount Against a Partnership Firm and Partners. The plaintiff claimed the maturity value based on an acknowledgment of liability and promissory estoppel, while the defendants raised a prior suit for injunction and accounts.
21 Jan 2025The plaintiff, a construction company, filed a commercial suit against a partnership firm (first defendant) and its partners (defendants 2 to 6) for r...
- 71
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Criminal Revision Against Summoning Order in Cheque Dishonour Case — Dispute Over Partnership Firm's Authority to File Complaint Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court held that a complaint under Section 138 must be filed by an authorized person, and partners are not automatically liable.
16 Sep 2025The applicants, Romell Housing LLP and Jude Romell, filed a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court challenging the summoning order...
- 45
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows Petition of Allottee in KIADB Act Case — Condition Requiring Prior Permission for Share Transfer Declared Ultra Vires. The Court held that the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board cannot impose restrictions on transfer of shares of an allottee company as such power is not conferred by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.
12 Jan 2024The petitioner, M/s. Kamalalayaa Real Estates LLP, a limited liability partnership firm, was allotted land by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Developme...
- 266
High Court
High Court of Bombay at Goa Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case Due to Non-Examination of Partner and Rebuttal of Presumption. Complainant Partnership Firm Failed to Prove Authority of Signing Partner and that Cheque Was Issued for Legally Enforceable Debt Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
2 Apr 2014The revision application was filed by M/s Reshmi Constructions, a partnership firm, through its partner Shri Pandharinath Chafadkar, challenging the j...
- 81
High Court
High Court of Bombay Examines Locus Standi and Transparency Challenges in MIDC Land Allotment Case. Individual partner's writ petition held not maintainable due to lack of authorization from partnership firm; however, broader policy challenge regarding MIDC's online priority allotment without public advertisement kept open for consideration.
8 Dec 2025The writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenged the decisions of the Minor Modification Committee and Land Allotm...
- 20
