Search Results for "prohibition officer"

2387 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2387 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Appeal Against SARFAESI Proceedings — Tenant's Claim Not Established. The court held that the appellant failed to prove tenancy and that the remedy under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act is available to any person aggrieved, including tenants.

The appellant, Modinasab Indikar, filed a first appeal before the High Court of Bombay at Goa against the order of the District Magistrate, Salcete, d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Workmen Seeking Absorption in Western Coalfields Limited — Canteen Workers Not Entitled to Direct Absorption as Contractor Was Not a Sham and Contract Labour Was Not Prohibited Under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1947.

The petitioner, a trade union representing workmen of Taroda Opencast Mine of Western Coalfields Limited, challenged an award of the Central Governmen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Bank's Revision and Appeal in SARFAESI Act Case — Civil Suit Barred Under Section 34. Jurisdiction of Civil Court is Ousted When Secured Creditor Takes Action Under SARFAESI Act for Enforcement of Security Interest.

The case involves a civil suit filed by Sagar and Saurabh Deshmukh (original plaintiffs) against their father Pramod Deshmukh, mother Vrunda Deshmukh,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Dismissal of Junior Clerk for Demanding Bribe in Service Matter. Disciplinary Authority's Order Based on Complainant's Testimony Found Sustainable in Absence of Procedural Violation or Bias.

The petitioner, Vinayak Narayan Navkar, was appointed as a Junior Clerk on 04.06.2005 and posted at the Court of 3rd Joint Civil Judge (Junior Divisio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act Due to Illegible Documents and Lack of Marathi Translation. Preventive Detention Violates Article 22(5) of Constitution When Grounds Not Communicated Effectively.

The petitioner, Rahul Ambadas Jadhav, was detained under the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug-offenders ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order Under COFEPOSA Act Due to Non-Supply of Incriminating Documents. Detenu's Right to Make Effective Representation Under Article 22(5) Violated as Statements of Co-Accused and Call Data Records Not Furnished.

The petitioner, wife of the detenu Vilas Vithal Ambokar, challenged a preventive detention order dated 10th April 2015 passed by the Principal Secreta...