Search Results for "excess payment recovery"

942 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 942 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Appeal in Commercial Dispute Over Berth Reservation Agreement — Restores Arbitral Award. Court Holds That Arbitral Tribunal's Findings on Limitation and Merits Were Not Perverse and Did Not Warrant Interference Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The appellant, M/s.X-Press Container Lines (UK) Ltd., entered into a Berth Reservation Agreement with the respondent, the Board of Trustees of the Por...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Considers Appeal Against Order Setting Aside Arbitral Award in Berth Reservation Dispute. Court Examines Whether the Claim Was Barred by Limitation and Whether the Award Was Patently Illegal Under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The judgment of the Madras High Court in OSA (CAD) No. 39 of 2021 involved an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Decides Arbitration Petition Challenging Award in Advertising Rights Tender Dispute. Court Examines Arbitral Award Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The arbitration petition arose from a tender floated by Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) on 9 November 2018 for allotment...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition of Retired Teacher Challenging Recovery of Excess Salary from Gratuity. Recovery of Rs.1,39,316/- Set Aside as Payment Was Due to Departmental Error Without Misrepresentation by Employee.

The petitioner, Ashok Buchayya Pusalwar, was an Assistant Teacher with the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli, appointed on 24-10-1996. He voluntarily retired...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Recovery of Excess Payments from In-Service Nursing Trainees Under Restitution Principle. Recovery Permitted as Payments Were Made Pursuant to Court Order Later Set Aside, Distinguishing Mistaken Payment Guidelines Under Rafiq Masih Case for Class III and IV Employees.

The dispute originated from in-service employees of the Rajasthan Medical & Health Subordinate Service, working as ANMs, Lab Technicians, and similar ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Recovery of Excess Pay in Ordnance Factory Case. Recovery of Excess Amount Paid Due to Employer's Mistake Held Impermissible When Employees Are in Same or Higher Pay Scale and No Misrepresentation Is Involved.

The petitioners, employees of Ordnance Factory Bhandara, were granted a higher pay scale by the employer. Subsequently, the employer sought to recover...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Allows Refund of Excess Stamp Duty Paid by Company in Stamp Duty Refund Case — Respondents Directed to Refund Rs.10,11,810/- with Interest. Petitioner Entitled to Refund Under Section 48 of Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 as Claim Was Within Limitation and Excess Payment Admitted.

The petitioner, Dalmiya Cement Venture Limited, a public limited company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, got registered several lands...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Notification Importing Customs Recovery Provisions for Excise Duty Interest. Section 12 of Central Excise Act, 1944 Validly Empowers Application of Customs Act Recovery Mechanisms for Interest on Delayed Payment of Excise Duty.

The petitioner, Krishnakant Sakharam Ghag, a partner of M/s Amit Textile Processors, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the va...