Search Results for "Non-Delivery"

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 Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "Non-Delivery"

26 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 26 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Adjudicates Cross-Petitions Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act Challenging Arbitral Award in Commercial Dispute; Award Directed Payment of Rs. 96.20 Lakhs Plus Interest and Costs for Non-Delivery of Equipment Under Purchase Order, While Supplier Challenged Deduction for Support Services.

2 Dec 2025

Background: The case involved cross-petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award dated 30 Ma...

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Hears Notice of Motion for Reference to Arbitration in Dispute Between Commodity Spot Exchange and Member. Defendant Exchange Seeks to Rely on Bye-Laws and Undertaking as Arbitration Agreement Under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

10 Sep 2014

...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Railway Non-Delivery Case — Notice Under Section 106 of Railways Act, 1989 Must Be Liberally Constructed. The court held that the notice dated 25-01-1993 was valid and the claim was not barred by limitation, as the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to the Railway Claims Tribunal.

11 Oct 2013

The appellant, M/s. Sapna Emporium, filed a first appeal against the judgment and order dated 22-09-1995 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bombay...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Railway Non-Delivery Case Due to Invalid Notice Under Section 106 of Railways Act, 1989. Notice Served Beyond Six-Month Limitation Period and Addressed to Wrong Authority.

4 Oct 2013

The appellant, M/s. Sapna Emporium, filed a first appeal against the judgment and order dated 22-09-1995 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bombay...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Railway Claims Tribunal Order in Tassar Silk Saree Loss Case — Limitation Period Under Section 103 of Railways Act, 1989 Is Not Applicable to Claims for Non-Delivery of Goods. The court held that Section 103 of the Railways Act, 1989 does not prescribe a period of limitation for filing a claim before the Railway Claims Tribunal, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain claims beyond six months from the date of booking if within the Limitation Act, 1963.

28 Jun 2012

The appellant, Development Corporation of Vidarbha Limited, a Government of Maharashtra undertaking, filed two claim applications before the Railway C...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Union of India's Appeal in Railway Claims Case — Claim for Non-Delivery of Onions Held Time-Barred Under Section 78B of Railways Act, 1890. Notice of Claim Given After Six Months from Date When Delivery Ought to Have Taken Place, Hence Claim Not Maintainable.

11 Feb 2010

The appellant, Union of India, represented by the General Managers of Central and Northern Railways, appealed against the judgment and decree of the R...

1 2 3

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