Search Results for "belated reply"

534 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 534 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Allows Petition Under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for Appointment of Arbitrator in Construction Contract Dispute. Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator to Adjudicate Disputes Arising from Contract Dated 27.09.2013.

The petitioner, Sobha Projects and Trade Private Limited, filed a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appointment of Independent Arbitrator in Railway Contract Dispute Under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrator by Respondent Held Invalid; Former High Court Judge Appointed as Sole Arbitrator.

The petitioner, M/s. Eagle – MPCC (J.V.), a joint venture company, entered into a contract with the respondent, South Western Railway, on 08/03/2011...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Appoints Arbitrator in Section 11 Petition After Nine-Year Delay. Petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, filed in 2008, finally disposed with appointment of sole arbitrator.

The petitioner, N.K. Developers Pvt. Ltd., filed a petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on 12.08.2008, seeking ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Reassessment Order in KVAT Case Due to Violation of Natural Justice — Assessee Not Given Opportunity to Cross-Examine Third Party. Section 39(1) Reassessment Set Aside as Assessing Authority Relied on Ex-Parte Statements Without Providing Opportunity to Rebut.

The petitioner, M/s. TTP Technologies Pvt. Ltd., a registered company represented by its Director Sri. M. Devarajaiah, filed writ petitions under Arti...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Articles of Charges Against KSRTC Employees for Lack of Power to Lay Traps Under Security Standing Orders. The court held that the Security Standing Orders do not authorize the laying of traps, rendering the disciplinary proceedings without jurisdiction.

The petitioners, employees of the Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) and Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), challenged the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeals by Apparel Companies Challenging Provident Fund Damages Order. Establishment of separate code number for each unit does not absolve liability under Section 14B of Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

The case involves multiple writ appeals filed by apparel companies (M/s J.D. Clothing Company, M/s Gokaldas India, M/s Wear Craft Apparels, and others...