It is up to the allottee to proceed either under Section 18(1) or under proviso to Section 18(1) . The RERA Act thus definitely provides a remedy to an allottee who wishes to withdraw from the Project or claim return on his investment.”
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S. IMPERIA STRUCTURE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. BRIG. HARIT PANT — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindrabhat and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha,…
In view of the difference of opinion expressed by two separate judgments, the Registry is directed to place the matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders/directions. CONTENTIONS rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 (d), for deciding the preliminary issue on pure question of law under Order XIV Rule 2(2) and for pronouncing a judgment on admission under Order XII Rule 6 being absolutely different and independent of each other
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SARANPAL KAUR ANAND — Appellant Vs. PRADUMAN SINGH CHANDHOK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. )…
Income Declaration Scheme (IDS) – HELD sequitur to a declaration under the IDS does not lead to immunity (from taxation) in the hands of a non-declarant.held that immunity granted by a tax amnesty scheme in respect of liabilities under some enactments, did not afford protection against action under other enactments or laws:
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) CIRCLE 1(2) — Appellant Vs. M/S. M. R. SHAH LOGISTICS PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Uday…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 9- held that a notice on behalf of the operational creditor by a lawyer would be in order.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JORD ENGINEERS INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITS SIGNATORY — Appellant Vs. VALIA AND CO. (D) THR. LRS. — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and…
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Section 3 – An establishment contributing to the economy of the country and providing livelihood ought not to be closed down only on the ground of the technical irregularity of not obtaining prior Environmental Clearance irrespective of whether or not the unit actually causes pollution.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S PAHWA PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. DASTAK NGO AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari,…
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – Section 15Z – Appeal to Supreme Court – – A question of law may arise when there is an erroneous construction of the legal provisions of the statute or the general principles of law. In such cases, the Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction of Section 15Z may substitute its decision on any question of law that it considers appropriate.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha,…
Absorption and regularisation – When the employee were appointed on a fixed term and on a fixed salary in a temporary unit which was created for a particular project, no such direction could have been issued by the High Court to absorb them in Government service and to regularise their services –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. R.J. PATHAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…
COVID-19 Deaths – False claim of compensation — If it is found that anybody has made a fake claim, the same shall be considered under Section 52 of the Act, 2005 and liable to be punished
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GAURAV KUMAR BANSAL — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Interlocutory…
When the contract not entered under MSME and parties would not be governed by the MSME Act and the parties shall be governed by the laws of India applicable and/or prevailing at the time of execution of the contract – Small Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council would have no jurisdiction
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. VAISHNO ENTERPRISES — Appellant Vs. HAMILTON MEDICAL AG AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil…
Appellant has been teaching the very same subject for the past nearly 16 years – Original Selection Committee which found him eligible for appointment, comprised of Professors from the Department of Sanskrit of which the diploma course in ‘Karm Kand’ was a part, a direction is issued to the University to regularise the services of the appellant.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DINESH CHANDRA SHUKLA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Civil…