Search Results for "Rule 58(4)"

346 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 346 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Hears Writ Petition Challenging Condonation of Delay in Filing Arbitration Application Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act. Dispute Centers on Whether Limitation Runs from Original Award or Belated Correction Order When Section 33 Application Filed Beyond 30 Days.

The writ petitions challenged the order of the Commercial Court condoning the delay in filing arbitration suits under Section 34 of the Arbitration an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Order of Status Quo and Appointment of Receiver in Property Dispute. Court Holds That Suit for Declaration and Injunction Is Not Barred by Limitation or Res Judicata and That Receiver Cannot Be Removed Without Proper Application.

The appeal arises from a suit filed by the respondents (Afzal Khan and others) against the appellants (Mehboob Ayub Khan and others) seeking declarati...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010026042017_1

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Suit Despite Defendant's Preliminary Objections. Plaintiff's Mark 'ESSEL' Found to Have Acquired Distinctiveness and Defendant's Use Likely to Cause Confusion.

The plaintiff, Essel Propack Ltd., filed a suit in 2010 against Essel Kitchenware Ltd. and another defendant for trademark infringement and passing of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Transfer Petition in Cheque Dishonour Case, Upholds Jurisdiction Under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Bank’s Right to Choose Jurisdiction for Cheque Dishonour Cases Upheld – Transfer Denied Under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Insolvent's Application to Set Aside Ex-Parte Adjudication Order in Insolvency Proceedings — Delay of 22 Days Condoned. The court held that the Insolvent had sufficient cause for non-appearance and that the ex-parte order was passed without proper service of notice.

The case involves an application by the Insolvent, Parmanand Sitlaprasad Pandey, seeking to set aside an ex-parte adjudication order passed in insolve...