Search Results for "owner definition"

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 Enhances Child Maintenance and Grants Interim Medical Maintenance ...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...

Search Results for "owner definition"

1747 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1747 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Allows Petitioners in DCR Interpretation Case Following Supreme Court's Godrej & Boyce Ruling. The Court Holds That Paragraph 6 of Appendix VII Entitles Owner to DRC Equal to Area of Constructed Amenity, Rejecting Circulars Limiting to 25%.

18 Dec 2018

Background: The consolidated writ petitions were filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay under Article 226 of the Constitution concerning ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Deemed Conveyance Order in Co-operative Housing Society Dispute — Lack of Notice to Original Landowner Violates Principles of Natural Justice. Deemed Conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA cannot be granted without affording opportunity of hearing to the developer who is not a member of the society.

4 Oct 2023

The petitioners, M/s. K.G. Associates (developer) and its partner, challenged an order dated 17 March 2020 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operat...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal of Plaintiffs in Tenancy Dispute — Plaintiffs Fail to Prove Tenancy Rights. Court holds that mere possession or payment of rent does not establish tenancy without proof of lawful transfer or succession under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.

10 Jun 2011

The case involves a dispute over a room (suit premises) allotted in lieu of an earlier tenanted room in a chawl at Mahim, Mumbai. The plaintiffs, Sulo...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Insurance Company Held Liable Despite Bus Being Under Corporation's Control. The Court distinguished earlier precedent and held that under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the insurance company is liable to pay compensation even when the vehicle is under the control of a state transport corporation.

1 Jan 2020

The appeal arose from a motor accident claim where a 45-year-old cyclist was killed after being hit by a bus on 16.08.2001. The bus was owned by a pri...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal of Legal Representatives in Motor Accident Claim — Insurer Liable Under Personal Accident Cover for Owner-Driver. Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does not bar claim for personal accident cover when insured dies while driving own vehicle.

29 Sep 2020

The appeal arises from a judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagpur, dated 6th February 2020, which dismissed a claim petition filed by th...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Deemed Owner Liability Under Section 163-A MV Act. Occupant of Jeep Treated as Third Party; Insurance Company Cannot Avoid Liability on Ground of Policy Exclusion.

18 Apr 2016

The appeal was filed by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited against the judgment and award dated 19.02.2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tri...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Owner's Appeal in Motor Vehicle Accident Case — Insurance Company Held Liable to Pay Compensation Despite Alleged Breach of Policy Conditions. The court held that the insurance company failed to prove that the owner had knowledge of the driver's lack of valid driving license, thus the insurance company is liable to pay compensation.

26 Feb 2015

The appellant, owner of an autorickshaw, challenged the judgment and award of the Additional MACT, Yadgir, which directed him to pay compensation of R...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Landlord's Appeal in Rent Control Case, Holding Club Activities Constitute Business Under the Act. The Court Interpreted 'Business' in Section 2(f) of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 in a Wider Sense to Include Non-Profit Club Activities, Thereby Applying Rent Control Jurisdiction.

17 Aug 2021

The dispute arose from an eviction petition filed by landlords against tenants, including a municipal committee and a club, over rented land in Ambala...

High Court

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Appeal in RERA Refund Dispute — Joint Developer Not Liable for Refund of Amounts Not Received. The court held that under Sections 12 and 18 of RERA, only a promoter who has received payment can be directed to refund, and joint and several liability cannot be imposed without statutory basis.

26 Feb 2024

The case involves a dispute under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) regarding the refund of amounts paid by an allottee to...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Against Eviction Notice Under Public Premises Act — Tenant's Rights Upheld. The Court held that premises owned by a nationalised company not taken over by the Central Government are not 'public premises' under Section 2(e) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, and the eviction notice was invalid.

7 Jun 2010

The petitioner, Dr. Suhas H. Pophale, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment and order of the P...

1 2 3 4 5

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