Search Results for "Contract"

329 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 329 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Clarified the Scope of Interim Moratorium under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Held That Regulatory Penalties Imposed by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Are Not Covered

Invoking Insolvency Proceedings Cannot stay execution of Penalty Orders for Consumer Protection Law Violations – The Apex Court Upheld the NCDRC’s...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Regularization of Contractual Employees — Interpretation of Initial Constitution under Sports Authority of India (SAI) Executive Cadre (Grade A) Staff Recruitment Rules, 2022 — Rejection of Recall Application

The Court emphasized that once a concession was made by a party’s counsel and recorded by the court, the party could not later challenge the ord...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court — Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Whether a limited liability partnership (LLP) not being a signatory to the LLP Agreement can still be made a party to arbitration proceedings arising out of the agreement.

a) An LLP, though not a signatory, is inherently connected to the LLP Agreement and its arbitration clause. b) The LLP’s operations and the partners...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Interpretation Of Manufacturing Process Under Factories Act, 1948 – Business Of Laundry Held To Constitute Manufacturing Process – Premises Deemed A Factory – Order Issuing Process Restored.

a. Definition of manufacturing process under Section 2(k) includes washing and cleaning for delivery and use – Laundry service falls squarely within...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court of India – Civil Appellate Jurisdiction – Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Limitation Period – Continuing Cause of Action – Error on Face of Record – Substantive Right Over Procedural Technicality – NCDRC Order Quashed and Set Aside.

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 67 – Limitation Period to File Complaint – Continuing Cause of Action Upheld – NCDRC's Dismissal on Li...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Former Gujarat Minister in Corruption Case – No Evidence of Demand or Acceptance of Bribe

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) – CrPC Section 482 – Discharge Application – Prima Facie Case – Illegal Gra...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court — Arbitration Award Upheld. Challenge Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Court Dismissed Petition — Upheld Arbitral Award Citing Commercial Common Sense and Non-Comparability of Data Points

The Bombay High Court upheld the arbitral award, dismissing the petition filed by the Union of India. The Court found the Arbitral Tribunal’s interp...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Modifies Expulsion of Bihar MLC to Suspension, Reinstates Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh – Proportionality in Legislative Punishment Under Scrutiny. Court Invokes Article 142 to Ensure Proportionality in Legislative Discipline, Reinstates Petitioner After 7 Months of Expulsion

Maintainability of Writ Petition: The Court held that the Writ Petition is maintainable as Article 212(1) does not bar judicial review of legislative...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Enforceability of Public Procurement Policy for Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) – Directs Review of Minimum Turnover Clauses in Tenders

Court Emphasizes Statutory Duty of Government to Procure 25% from MSEs – Guidelines Issued for Effective Implementation of Procurement Policy T...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Dispute Over Success-Based Fees for Financial Advisory Services. Interpretation of Mandate Letter and Discretion in Fee Payment for NPA Sales – Bombay High Court Decides in Favor of Defendant

The Bombay High Court held that the Defendant had the discretion to choose between the two fee options (0.50% or 0.0749%) after the sale was completed...