WRIT PETITION NO. 107119 OF 2025 (APMC)
27 Oct 2025...
Search Results for "implied compliance"
806 result(s) found
Found 806 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Section 9A of Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act Requiring Caste Validity Certificate for Councillors. Provision Held Valid as It Is a Reasonable Classification to Prevent Fraud on Reservation and Does Not Violate Articles 14 and 243T.
18 Oct 2019The petitioners, elected councillors of Jalna Municipal Council from reserved categories, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 9A of the ...
- 108
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Appointment of Arbitrator in Slum Rehabilitation Dispute Between State of Maharashtra and Developer. Court Holds That Existence of Arbitration Clause and Failure of Respondent to Appoint Arbitrator Justifies Appointment Under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
30 Nov -0001The State of Maharashtra filed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an arbitrator to reso...
- 134
High Court
Bombay High Court Upholds Withholding of Pension for Misconduct in Municipal Corporation Cases. Pensionary benefits can be withheld under Pension Rules for misconduct committed during service, even after retirement, if proceedings are initiated within a reasonable time.
3 Feb 2005The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by former employees of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (now Mumbai) challenging the Commiss...
- 125
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Employer's Petition Challenging Reinstatement Order — Daily Wager Not Entitled to Reinstatement for Failure to Complete 240 Days Service. The court held that the workman did not complete 240 days of continuous service in the 12 months preceding retrenchment, and thus the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with backwages was perverse and unsustainable.
7 Oct 2005The petitioner, M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited, challenged the award of the First Labour Court, Pune, in Reference (IDA) No.36 of 1990, which directed reinst...
- 35
High Court
High Court of Bombay Sets Aside Exparte Arbitral Award for Violation of Natural Justice and Lack of Proper Notice. Appointment of Arbitrator by Respondent Without Petitioner's Consent and Conduct of Proceedings Without Notice to Petitioner Renders Award Liable to Be Set Aside Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
7 Jan 2013The petitioner, M/s. Zenith Fire Services (India) Private Limited, challenged an exparte arbitral award dated 31 October 2011 passed by a sole arbitra...
- 204
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Challenge to Interim Stay on Transfer Orders in Unfair Labour Practice Case. Transfer of Workmen During Pendency of Industrial Disputes Constitutes Prima Facie Unfair Labour Practice Under MRTU & PULP Act.
13 Apr 2006The petitioner, Bajaj Auto Limited, challenged an interim order dated 23rd December 2005 passed by the Industrial Court, Pune, in Complaint (ULP) No.4...
- 87
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Specific Performance Suit — Rejects Application for Rejection of Plaint Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Agreement for Sale Not Concluded Contract but Continuous Offer, Plaint Discloses Cause of Action.
17 Nov 2025The appellant, M/s. Everhome Properties Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale dated 15.07.2019 against the respond...
- 132
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows State's Petition to Set Aside Arbitral Award in Land Acquisition Dispute — Compensation Enhancement Set Aside Due to Lack of Evidence. Court holds that the Arbitral Tribunal cannot award compensation beyond the Reference Court's award without proper evidence under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
30 Nov -0001The case involves two cross-petitions arising out of an arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, concerning compensation for l...
- 71
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award on Limitation Grounds — Section 34 Application Filed Beyond Limitation Period. Court holds that period of limitation for challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 runs from the date of receipt of the original award and is not extended by a subsequent correction application under Section 33.
7 Jan 2014The petitioner, Marwadi Shares & Finance Ltd, a member of the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange, had disputes with its constituent, re...
- 85
