Search Results for "delay penalty"

1479 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1479 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Partially Allows Builder's Appeal in Consumer Dispute Over Forfeiture of Earnest Money — Reduces Forfeiture from 20% to 10% of Basic Sale Price. Court upholds NCDRC's power to strike down unconscionable contractual terms but modifies interest rate and forfeiture percentage based on facts.

The present appeal arises from a consumer complaint filed by the respondents (buyers) against the appellant (builder, Godrej Projects Development Limi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Bank's Appeal in SARFAESI Auction Dispute — Extension of Time Not Binding Without Confirmation Letter. Forfeiture of Earnest Money Upheld Under Rule 9(5) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the State Bank of India (the Bank) against the judgment of the Madras High Court. The dispute arose from...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Employer's Appeal in Workmen's Compensation Case — Remands for Fresh Determination on Disability and Wages. Commissioner's order set aside for failure to consider relevant evidence and apply correct legal principles under Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.

The appeal was filed by the Shipping Corporation of India Limited, the employer, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, challenging...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Real Estate Dispute — Upholds Concurrent Findings on Agreement to Sell and Possession. Appellant failed to prove readiness and willingness to perform contract under Section 16(c) of Specific Relief Act, 1963.

The appellant, Mohammed Zain Khan, filed a Second Appeal before the Bombay High Court challenging the concurrent judgments of the trial court and the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Land Allotment for Temple Construction — No Public Interest Violation Found. Court held that allotment of land for a temple under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code does not require public auction and is permissible for religious purposes.

The judgment pertains to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by two petitioners, Bapu Shankar Dighe and Dadasaheb Kusabapu Pawar, challenging the...