Search Results for "Prohibitory order"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment...
Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witn...

Search Results for "Prohibitory order"

363 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 363 result(s)

High Court

Madras High Court Dismisses Contempt Petitions Against Judgment Debtor and Sub Registrars for Alleged Willful Disobedience of Prohibitory Order and Communication Order in Execution Proceedings. Court Held That the Prohibitory Order Under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC Was Not Served on the Judgment Debtor and the Communication Order Was Not a Mandatory Direction, Thus No Willful Disobedience Established.

11 Feb 2026

The petitioner, A. Dakshnamoorthy, as power agent of his son D. Chandrasekaran, filed two contempt petitions. The first (Cont.P.No.1723/2025) was agai...

High Court

Madras High Court Dismisses Contempt Petitions Against Judgment Debtor and Sub Registrars for Alleged Willful Disobedience of Prohibitory Order and Communication Order in Execution Proceedings. Court Holds That Prohibitory Order Under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC Does Not Create a Charge on Property and That Sub Registrars Are Not Bound by Such Orders Unless Property Is Attached.

11 Feb 2026

The petitioner, D. Chandrasekaran, represented by his power agent A. Dakshnamoorthy, filed two contempt petitions. The first, Cont.P.No.1723 of 2025, ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Prohibitory Order Against Contractor in EPF Recovery Proceedings — Third Party Debtor Cannot Be Restrained Without Proper Adjudication Under Section 8G of EPF Act. The court held that a prohibitory order under Section 8G of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 requires prior determination of the debt owed by the third party to the employer, and cannot be issued solely on the basis of a recovery certificate against the employer.

18 Nov 2025

The petitioner, B.T. Kadlag Constructions, a private limited company, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes ESIC Demand Notices for Non-Application of Mind and Violation of Natural Justice. Employer's Failure to Produce Records Does Not Justify Ex-Parte Assessment Without Proper Opportunity of Hearing.

19 Sep 2025

The petitioners, a company and its director, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging various demand notices, recovery notices, ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in Rent Control Matter — First Appellate Court Exceeded Jurisdiction Under Section 43 Rule 1(u) CPC by Remanding Suit Without Framing Substantial Question of Law. The High Court held that the First Appellate Court cannot reverse a trial court decree and remand the suit without framing a substantial question of law as mandated by Section 43 Rule 1(u) CPC.

17 Jun 2025

The appellant, Mustaf s/o Goususab Halagali @ Holageri, was the defendant in O.S.No.142/2014 filed by the respondent, Gangadhar s/o Channamallappa Jad...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petitions for Alleged Wilful Disobedience of Earlier Judgment in SARFAESI Auction Dispute — No Contempt Made Out as Subsequent Transfers Were Not in Breach of Court Orders. The Court held that the earlier judgment did not contain any specific direction restraining transfers, and the respondents had acted under colour of subsequent orders from the DRT and High Court.

13 Dec 2024

The Supreme Court dismissed contempt petitions filed by Celir LLP, the successful auction purchaser, alleging wilful disobedience of its earlier judgm...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Dispute, Upholds Injunction Against Obstruction of Possession. The Court held that the first appellate court's concurrent findings of fact regarding possession and title cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as no substantial question of law arose.

16 Apr 2024

The case involves a property dispute between the appellants (defendants) and the respondents (plaintiffs) over a shop named 'Sadhana Stores' and adjac...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Disqualification of Sarpanch for Non-Conduct of Gram Sabha Meetings During COVID-19 Pandemic. Failure to hold four Gram Sabha meetings due to prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC and COVID-19 restrictions is not wilful default under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958.

24 Feb 2023

The petitioner, Manohar Dnyaneshwar Pote, was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Gundewadi in Jalna district. Respondent No.3, Sahebrao Balwanta Pote, fil...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against High Court Order Returning Plaint for Want of Pecuniary Jurisdiction in Suit for Injunction and Damages. The Court Held That for Order VII Rule 11 CPC, Only Plaint Averments Are Relevant, Not Evidence.

5 Aug 2022

The appellant, Bharat Bhushan Gupta, filed a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction and recovery of damages against the respondents, Pratap Nar...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Prohibitory Order Under Regulation 21 of CHALR, 2004 — No Appeal Lies to CESTAT. Regulation 22(8) of CHALR, 2004 is Not Ultra Vires the Customs Act, 1962.

5 Apr 2013

The appeal arises from a decision of the CESTAT dated 2 January 2013, which held that an appeal is not maintainable against an order passed under Regu...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)