Search Results for "territorial restriction"

141 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 141 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Petition Against Ban on Transport of Banned Food Products Through Maharashtra. Inter-State Transport of Banned Products Not Prohibited Under Section 30(2)(a) of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

The petitioners, including the driver, cleaner, owner of a truck, and a transporter, challenged an order dated 15/7/2020 issued by the Food Safety Com...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Lessee's Claim for Damages in Wild Life Sanctuary Case — No Right to Compensation Without Acquisition. Notification Under Section 18 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 Does Not Confer Right to Damages for Loss of Use.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by M/s Natesan Agencies (Plantations), a partnership firm, against the judgment of the Madras High Court ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Injunction in Non-Compete Clause Dispute. Temporary Injunction Granted to Restrain Former Employee from Competing with Employer for Three Years Based on Contractual Non-Compete Agreement.

The petitioner, Tapas Kanti Mandal, was employed by Cosmo Films Ltd. as a manager in its Research and Development Department from May 2003. He resigne...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Bank's Petition Challenging Banking Ombudsman Award for Wrongful Debit Despite Stop Payment Instructions. Bank's Liability Upheld as Limitation Period Under Banking Ombudsman Scheme 1995 is Directory, Not Mandatory.

The case involves a dispute between Canara Bank (the petitioner) and Shri Uttam Rathod (respondent no.1), a proprietor of M/s. Rishi Impex, who held a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Development Charge Levy in Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act. The court held that the levy is a fee for services rendered and not a tax, and the amendment is within legislative competence.

The petitioners, The Solapur Promoters and Builders Association Society and another, challenged the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Regiona...