Search Results for "Equitable recovery"

850 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 850 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Revision by Statutory Body in Suit for Accounts — Suit for Accounts Not Maintainable Against Statutory Body Without Contractual Right. Plaint Rejected Under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC as Barred by Law.

The case involves a civil revision application filed by the Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board (defendant) challenging an order of the Civil ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Allows Secured Creditor's Appeal Against Direction to Deposit Title Deeds in Insolvency — Official Assignee Cannot Demand Title Deeds Without Adjudication of Mortgage Validity Under Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909.

The appeal was filed by Punjab National Bank (the appellant) against an order of a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in Official Assignee'...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Electricity Disconnection of Sick Industrial Company. Government's Communication to MSEDCL to Disconnect Supply Set Aside as Violative of Natural Justice and Contrary to BIFR Directions.

The petitioner, Goradia Special Steels Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, is a sick industrial company registered with the Boa...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Under Essential Commodities Act for Non-Essential Commodities. Wheat and Rice Seized by Rationing Authorities Held Not Covered Under Essential Commodities Act, 1955 or Control Orders.

The petitioners, including M/s. Ace International, Pankaj Pranjibhai Thakkar, and M/s. Metro International, filed three writ petitions challenging the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding Up Petitions for Non-Compliance with Statutory Notice Under Section 434 of Companies Act, 1956. Statutory notice requirement under Section 434(1)(a) held mandatory and cannot be waived by agreement between parties.

The petitioner, Dolphin Investment Pvt. Ltd., filed two company petitions under Section 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking winding up ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging SAFEMA Forfeiture Orders — Bank's Mortgage Rights Protected as Prior Encumbrance. The Court held that forfeiture under Section 7 of SAFEMA does not extinguish a prior bona fide mortgage created before the issuance of the show cause notice.

The Petitioner, Development Credit Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 12th Mar...