Search Results for "firm name"

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 "firm name"

2353 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2353 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Disposes of Two Writ Petitions and a Civil Application in a Property Dispute Involving Alleged Fraudulent Consent Decree. The Court Examined the Challenge to the Trial Court's Rejection of Applications to Stay and Set Aside the Consent Decree Passed in Favor of the Respondent in a Suit for Injunction.

28 Jan 2015

The case involves two writ petitions and a civil application arising out of a property dispute regarding two flats on the seventh floor of Flushel Apa...

High Court

Bombay High Court Hears Appeal Against Company Law Board Order Dismissing Petition. Court Frames Questions on Applicability of Section 111A and Section 43A of Companies Act, 1956 to Deemed Public Company.

14 Jun 2011

The appeal arose from a company petition filed by the appellants, members of the Kavasmaneck family, before the Company Law Board, Mumbai, alleging op...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Execution Against Partner in Consent Decree — Order XXI Rule 50 CPC. Leave under Order XXI Rule 50 CPC is required to execute a consent decree against a partner of a partnership firm, and the execution application and warrant of attachment can be amended to include the partner's name.

29 Aug 2005

The plaintiffs, M/s. G.M. Breweries Ltd., filed five summary suits against various defendants, including partnership firms. In Suit No.1791 of 2002, a...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Retrospective Penalty Under Section 69A of Indian Partnership Act, 1932 for Non-Intimation of Alterations. The court upheld the validity of the Maharashtra Amendment Act 29 of 1984 imposing retrospective penalty for failure to intimate changes in partnership deeds.

26 Sep 2006

The petitioners, M/s. Adamji Lookmanji & Co. and others, filed a writ petition challenging orders dated 25th April, 2005 and 12th October, 2004 passed...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Partner's Challenge to Prosecution Under Section 138 NI Act Without Joining Firm. Partnership Firm Not a Separate Legal Entity; Partner Can Be Prosecuted Individually for Cheque Dishonour.

29 Jan 2016

The case involves four criminal writ petitions filed by the petitioner, Philip J., challenging the order dated 23 July 2013 passed by the Additional S...

High Court

KAHC010159832015_1

15 Dec 2017

...

High Court

Bombay High Court Delivers Judgment on Interim Applications in Property Suits Regarding Appointment of Court Receiver. The Heirs of Sole Proprietor Seek Relief Against Multiple Defendants Including Developers and Property Owners.

3 Nov 2025

...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Bank's Appeal in Evacuee Property Dispute, Holding Joint Family Firm Not Exempt from Vesting. Cash Deposit of Hindu Joint Family Firm Held to Be Evacuee Property, Vested in Pakistan Custodian, Extinguishing Bank's Liability under Private International Law.

13 Feb 1969

The dispute arose from a cash credit account maintained by M/s. Ghamandi Ram Gurbax Rai, a joint Hindu family firm, with the Imperial Bank of India in...

High Court

Bombay High Court Pronounced Judgment on Writ Petition Against Refusal of Stamp Duty Refund Under Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. Limitation Dispute Under Section 48(3) Due to Correction of Applicant's Name Beyond Six Months.

9 Jan 2023

The writ petition was filed by Freedom City Ventures, a partnership firm, seeking to quash the order dated 21st June 2014 passed by the Inspector Gene...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Cancellation of Plot Allotment in CIDCO Hospital Scheme — Petitioner's Partnership Firm Not Required to Register Under Bombay Public Trust Act. The court held that the condition for registration under the Bombay Public Trust Act applied only to charitable trusts, not to partnership firms, and that the petitioner had substantially complied with the eligibility criteria.

6 Dec 2016

The petitioner, Shushrusha Heart Care Centre and Specialty Center, a partnership firm, applied for allotment of Plot No. C-5 in CIDCO, Aurangabad, res...

2 3 4 5 6

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