Search Results for "client margin stock"

49 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 49 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay hears section 34 petition challenging arbitral award; outcome not specified. The petition challenged an appellate arbitral award that had affirmed an earlier primary award, under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The petitioner, Jagadeesa G. Chary, filed Arbitration Petition No. 410 of 2014 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Unconditional Stay of Arbitral Award Due to Stamp Duty Deficiency. Arbitration Agreement in Unstamped Member Client Agreement Held Void Ab Initio Under Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958.

The petitioner, M/s. Anand Rathi Share & Stock Brokers Ltd., challenged an order passed by the District Judge-1, Amravati, which granted unconditional...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Suit for Redemption of Pledged Securities After Loan Default; Plaintiffs Abandoned Main Claim of Transfer Agreement. Pledge Agreement Clause 14(ii) Notice and Default by Pledgor Form Core of Dispute Over Shares of Sesa Sterlite.

The suit was filed by Harinarayan G. Bajaj and others against Reliance Capital Limited and Sesa Sterlite Limited. Plaintiffs borrowed a total of Rs.10...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Arbitral Award in Stock Broker Dispute Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Court Upholds Award as Not Suffering from Patent Illegality or Being Against Public Policy, Refusing to Reappreciate Evidence.

The petitioner, Angel Capital & Debt Market Limited, a stock broker, challenged an arbitral award dated 16 May 2009 under Section 34 of the Arbitratio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Dismisses Broker's Challenge to Arbitral Award in Client Dispute Over Delay Paying Charges. Unilateral Charging of 2% Daily Interest Without Specific Agreement or Proof of Loss Held Unconscionable and Not Enforceable Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The case involves a dispute between Sharekhan Limited, a trading member/broker of the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), and Nita Thakkar, a client. The bro...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award in Stock Broker Dispute for Lack of Reasons and Non-Consideration of Margin Requirements. Award under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 set aside as Arbitrator failed to consider deposit and margin obligations of client.

The Petitioner, Anand Rathi Share and Stock Brokers Ltd., a share and stock broker and member of NSE, challenged an arbitral award dated 15 October 20...