Search Results for "Equitable recovery"

831 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 831 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Recovery of Alleged Excess Pay from Leave Encashment – Section 33-C(1) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Recovery of excess payment after five years held iniquitous and arbitrary, following Chandi Prasad Uniyal principle.

The petitioner, Vilas Pandurang Markande, a former employee of the Mumbai Port Trust (respondent No.2), filed a Writ Petition challenging the order da...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Teacher's Petition Against Pay Reduction and Recovery Order — Recovery of Excess Payment Set Aside Due to No Misrepresentation. Pay Fixation Error by Employer Cannot Be Recovered from Employee Without Show Cause Notice.

The petitioner, Premchand Nathu Patil, was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 16.06.1989 in a secondary school run by respondent No. 5 institute. He...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding Up Petition in Commission Dispute. Debt Held Bona Fide Disputed Under Sections 433(e) and 434 of Companies Act, 1956.

The petitioner, Total Sports & Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd., filed a winding up petition under Sections 433(e) and (f) and 434 of the Companies Act, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Property Dispute, Restores Trial Court Decree for Possession and Damages. Defendant's Possession Not Protected Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Due to Breach of Contract and Non-Performance.

The case involves a second appeal filed by the original plaintiff, Deorao Balaji Bhoyar (since deceased, through legal representatives), against the j...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds DRAT Order Allowing One Time Settlement in Debt Recovery Case — Interest Must Be Calculated as Per OTS Terms. The court held that the DRT erred in not giving effect to the OTS and in calculating interest beyond the OTS terms, and the DRAT correctly set aside the DRT order.

The petitioners, Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) and India SME Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., challenged an order dated 26th Ma...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses MSRTC Petition Challenging Industrial Court Order Quashing Recovery Notices for Excess Wages Paid to Employees. Recovery of wages paid under mistake of law held impermissible without prior notice and opportunity of hearing.

The Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 30/09/2005 passed by the Industrial Court, L...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Writ Petition Challenging Estate Officer’s Jurisdiction Under PP Act Against SARFAESI Possession. Asset Reconstruction Company Asserts SARFAESI Act Overrides PP Act, Requiring Landlord to Approach Debt Recovery Tribunal.

The writ petitioner, an Asset Reconstruction Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and registered under the SARFAESI Act, challenged the ...