Search Results for "Calcutta scheme"

976 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 976 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Writ Petition Challenging Retirement of Operatives Under Wrong Standing Orders — MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. Industrial Court directed to decide whether petitioners are Operatives governed by Standing Order 20-A or non-operatives under Model Standing Orders.

The petitioners, three employees of M/s Kohinoor Mills (a unit of NTC Ltd.), filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Probate Case, Holding Injunction Not Maintainable in Testamentary Proceedings. Executor Must Seek Property Protection Before Civil Court, Not in Probate Petition Under Indian Succession Act, 1925.

The appellant, Ramchandra Ganpatrao Hande, filed a testamentary petition seeking probate of a will allegedly executed by Sushila Vithalrao Hande on 2 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal Against Compensation Award for Traumatic Amputation. The Tribunal's assessment of 70% disability and award of Rs.5,02,600 under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was upheld as just and proper.

The case involves an appeal by the insurance company against an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mumbai, granting compensation to the clai...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Cross Appeals in Part in Arbitration Dispute Over Interim Measures Under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court Clarifies That an Award Creditor Can Seek Interim Relief During Section 34 Proceedings to Secure the Award Amount.

The case involves cross appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 arising from a common order dated 1 July 2019 passed by...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Criminal Writ Petition Challenging Order Allowing Additional Statements at Pre-Charge Stage. Production of Additional Statements Under Section 173(8) CrPC Without Notice to Accused and Without Opportunity to Cross-Examine Violates Fair Trial Rights.

The petitioners, original accused in Sessions Case No.644 of 1996, challenged an order dated 16th October 2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge...