Search Results for "Parle International"

77 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 77 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice Due to 12-Year Delay in Adjudication — Principles of Timely Adjudication Under Service Tax Law. Inordinate delay and corporate restructuring rendered adjudication futile, leading to quashing of show cause notice under Article 226.

The petitioner, IDFC First Bank Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of a show cause notice dat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Show Cause Notice in Customs Duty Demand Case Due to Inordinate Delay — 9-Year Delay in Adjudication Violates Principles of Natural Justice and Is Oppressive Under Customs Act, 1962.

The petitioner, Eastern Agencies Aromatics (P) Ltd., a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, filed a writ petition challenging a Show Caus...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR in Sexual Assault Case Due to Compromise and Settlement Between Parties — Court Holds That When Offences Are Not Heinous and Parties Have Settled, Continuation of Proceedings Would Be an Abuse of Process of Law.

The petitioner, Chirag Sundarlal Gupta, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cod...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partly Allows MTNL's Challenge to Arbitral Award, Reduces Future Interest from 18% to 9%. Court upheld the arbitrator's findings on quantum but modified the future interest rate as excessive under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The petitioner, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL), a Central Government Corporation, challenged an arbitral award dated 3 July 2006 passed by a so...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal as Infructuous in Bank Recovery Suit — Suit Already Disposed of by Debts Recovery Tribunal. Appeal becomes infructuous when the underlying suit is transferred to and disposed of by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, leaving no live controversy.

The present appeal arose out of Summary Suit No.1860 of 1992 filed by Punjab & Sind Bank against the appellants and others. The suit was transferred t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal as Infructuous After Suit Transferred to Debts Recovery Tribunal and Disposed. Appeal becomes infructuous when the underlying suit is transferred to a Debts Recovery Tribunal and disposed of.

The appeal arose from Summary Suit No.2608 of 1992 filed by Punjab & Sind Bank and others. The suit was transferred to the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal as Infructuous in Banking Recovery Case Due to Transfer of Suit to Debts Recovery Tribunal. Appeal Becomes Infructuous When Original Suit Is Transferred to DRT and Disposed of by Judgment Dated 14th January 2005.

The appeal arose from Summary Suit No.2026 of 1992 filed by Punjab & Sind Bank against the appellants and others. The suit was transferred to the Debt...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal as Infructuous in Banking Dispute Due to Transfer and Disposal of Original Suit by Debts Recovery Tribunal. Appeal arising from summary suit becomes infructuous when the original suit is transferred to and disposed of by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

The appeal arose from a summary suit filed by Punjab & Sind Bank against the appellants and others. During the pendency of the appeal, the original su...