KAHC020042082025_1
29 Jul 2026...
Search Results for "limited review"
3976 result(s) found
Found 3976 result(s)
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal Against Debarment Order in Transformer Supply Contract Dispute — Modification of Debarment Period Upheld but Effective Date Changed. The High Court's modification of the debarment effective date from 30.07.2020 to 13.02.2020 was upheld as within its discretion, and no interference was warranted.
13 Dec 2021The appellant, a proprietorship firm engaged in manufacturing and repairing transformers, had been supplying to Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut V...
- 146
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Petitioners in Tender Exclusion Case Due to Non-Application of Mind by State. Exclusion from tender for school uniform cloth procurement set aside as evaluation committee failed to consider petitioners' compliance with technical specifications.
12 Mar 2024The petitioners, Kanchan India Limited and Arvind Cotsyn India Limited, challenged their exclusion from a tender process issued by the Government of M...
- 58
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Quashes Notification Including Jat Community in Central Backward Classes List as Union Cabinet Rejected NCBC Advice Without Adequate Consideration. Inclusion by Notification Dated 04.03.2014 Violates Statutory Scheme Under National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.
1 Jan 1970The present group of writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution challenged a Notification dated 04.03.2014 issued by the Union of India, whic...
- 125
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Applicant in Medical Treatment Withdrawal Case — CANH Held to Be Medical Treatment and Withdrawal Permitted Under Best Interest Principle. Right to Die with Dignity under Article 21 Recognised to Include Withholding of Life-Sustaining Treatment from Patient in Permanent Vegetative State.
1 Jan 1970The matter arose from a tragic accident in 2013 when Harish Rana, then a 20-year-old engineering student, fell from the fourth floor of his accommodat...
- 59
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Quashes Compulsory Retirement Order of IRS Officer Due to Bias and Malice. Compulsory retirement under Rule 56(j) of Fundamental Rules, 1922, set aside as it was punitive, violated natural justice due to biased committee members, and disregarded clean service record.
3 Mar 2023The dispute involved an Indian Revenue Service officer challenging his compulsory retirement under Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules, ordered three ...
- 343
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows State's Appeal, Upholds Rejection of Bid for Suppression of Material Facts in Public Tender. Bidder's Failure to Disclose FIR and Charge Sheet for Bridge Collapse Constitutes Fraudulent Practice Under N.I.T. Clauses.
8 Sep 2020The Supreme Court of India heard appeals by the State of Madhya Pradesh against a High Court judgment that had set aside the rejection of U.P. State B...
- 230
High Court
Bombay High Court Partially Allows Writ Petition in Principal's Retirement Extension Case — Compensation Enhanced for Wrongful Deprivation of Consideration. Management's failure to conduct performance review for extension of retirement age from 62 to 65 years under Government Resolution dated 5 March 2011 held violative of petitioner's right, but reinstatement not possible due to age; compensation of three months' salary and costs enhanced to full salary and allowances for three years.
7 Oct 2023The petitioner, Dr. Rajendra Dagdulal Kankariya, a professor and former principal, challenged the judgment of the Mumbai University and College Tribun...
- 67
High Court
Bombay High Court Quashes Attachment Order in Defamation Suit Execution — Attachment of Immovable Property Without Notice to Judgment Debtor Violates Order XXI Rule 54 CPC. Court holds that issuance of attachment warrant without prior notice to the judgment debtor and without recording reasons is illegal and liable to be set aside.
4 Sep 2013The petitioner, Dilipkumar Hirachand Jain, was the original plaintiff No.2 in Special Civil Suit No.332 of 1996, which was a suit for damages for defa...
- 119
High Court
Bombay High Court Hears Commercial Arbitration Petition Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Against Arbitral Award Directing Payment of Damages for Revenue Shortfall. The Award Found That the Business Centre Operator Failed to Make Endeavour to Achieve Revenue Projections in Business Plan Annexed to Management Agreement.
25 Nov 2025This judgment of the Bombay High Court addressed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by Regus South Mumbai...
- 15
