Search Results for "Nidhi Company"

159 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 159 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Partly Allows Appeal by BMTC in Motor Accident Claim, Reduces Compensation Due to Multiplier Error. Tribunal's Use of Multiplier '18' for Deceased Aged 30 Years Held Incorrect; Proper Multiplier is '17' Under Sarla Verma Guidelines.

The appellant, Managing Director of Motor Claims Hub, BMTC, challenged the judgment and award dated 01.01.2022 passed by the XIV Additional Small Caus...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds NCDRC Decision: Execution Cannot Proceed Against Directors/Promoters Not Party to Original Consumer Complaint Decree

The Supreme Court upheld the NCDRC's dismissal of execution applications against directors/promoters of ACIPL, holding that execution must strictly co...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Employer's Writ for ABRY Scheme Benefits — Late ECR Filing Not Fatal to Claim. Clause 5 of ABRY Scheme 3.0 Interpreted as Directory, and Baseline Employees Cannot Be Reduced Retrospectively by EPFO.

The petitioner, Lakshmi Electrical Drives Corporate Services LLP, a manpower services provider in Tamil Nadu, filed a writ petition under Article 226 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against SEBI Order Declaring Art Funds as Collective Investment Schemes. Trusts managing pooled investments in art works held to be Collective Investment Schemes under SEBI Act, 1992, despite being structured as trusts rather than companies.

The Supreme Court dismissed Civil Appeal No. 19936 of 2017 challenging the order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal which had upheld SEBI's directio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...