Advanced Search Results
Sri Agasteswara Swamy Temple, Vangipuram Vs. V.Siva Kameswara Rao and ...
Andhra Pradesh
Dec-31-2013
Education
Steel Authority of India Limited and another1, the Supreme Court considered the scope of Section 53-A(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 ( which provided for an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against any directions issued or a decision made … THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.1131 of 2012 31-12-2013 Sri Agasteswara Swamy Temple, Vangipuram Village....APPELLANT V.Siva Kameswara
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) Vs. Competition Commission of I ...
Delhi
Mar-30-2016
MRTP
the impugned orders are perverse? Jurisdiction of CCI to entertain the complaints of Micromax and Intex under the Competition Act, 2002 84. The central challenge in these petitions is to the jurisdiction of the CCI to entertain complaints filed … the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (hereafter 'TRIPS'). 122. By virtue of the Patents (Amendment) Act 2002, Section 48 of the Act, which specifies the rights granted to a patentee, was substituted to read as under: … lack of understanding of the subject prior to directing investigation against Ericsson. 53. Ms. Singh also sought to dispute Mr. Kathpalia's interpretation of proviso of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskCompetition Commission of India Vs. Thomas Cook (India) Ltd. .
Supreme Court of India
Apr-17-2018
Land Acquisition
(in short, “the Tribunal”) setting aside the order passed by the Competition Commission under section 43A of the Competition Act, 2002 (in short, referred to as “the Act”) whereby penalty of Rupees One Crore 2 was imposed on the … the Act. As against the same the appeal was preferred. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed under section 53 B of the Act and has set aside the order passed by the Commission. Aggrieved thereby, the appeal … 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.13578 OF 2015 COMPETITION
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
State Tax Officer (1) Vs. Rainbow Papers Limited
Supreme Court of India
Sep-06-2022
Education
that where the resolution plan contains a provision for combination, as referred to in Section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002 (12 of 2003), the resolution applicant shall obtain the approval of the Competition Commission of India under that … by the dealer on account of tax, interest, penalty etc. under the said GVAT Act, cannot prevail over Section 53 of the IBC.2. The short question raised by the appellant in this appeal is, whether the provisions of … REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1661 OF2020STATE TAX OFFICER
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAirports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India Vs. Delhi Internationa ...
Supreme Court of India
Oct-18-2024
MRTP
in proceedings initiated suo moto by it since it is a dominus litus in such proceedings;49 47 The Competition Act 2002; Section 53S; Also see the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations 2009; Regulation 51 48 (2010) 10 SCC744[104]. 49 … No.8217 of 2023 With Civil Appeal No.7767 of 2023 With Civil Appeal Nos.10691-10692 of 2024 Page 1 of 53 With Civil Appeal No.393 of 2024 With Civil Appeal No.10678 of 2024 And With Civil Appeal No.10659 of … Reportable 2024 INSC791IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. 3098-3099 of 2023
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskCompetition Commission of India Vs. Jcb India Ltd. and Ors.
Delhi
Dec-02-2014
MRTP
are as under:Bull Machines Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.2 herein) filed information before CCI under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the said Act by JCB India Ltd. (respondent No.1 … LPA7152014 Pronounced on:02. 12.2014 COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA ... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Mr. Abhimanyu Chopra, Mr. Nitish Sharma … of the Act and only the order passed by the CCI under Section 26(2) is made appealable under Section 53-A. It was made clear in CCI v. SAIL (supra) that the directions passed by CCI in exercise of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskCompetition Commission of India Vs. Jcb India Ltd. and Ors.
Delhi
Dec-02-2014
MRTP
are as under:Bull Machines Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.2 herein) filed information before CCI under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the said Act by JCB India Ltd. (respondent No.1 … LPA7152014 Pronounced on:02. 12.2014 COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA ... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Mr. Abhimanyu Chopra, Mr. Nitish Sharma … of the Act and only the order passed by the CCI under Section 26(2) is made appealable under Section 53-A. It was made clear in CCI v. SAIL (supra) that the directions passed by CCI in exercise of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskM/S. Dlf Limited and Another Vs. Competition Commission of India and O ...
Competition Appellate Tribunal
May-19-2014
Land Acquisition
the above-said clauses were described as ex-facie unfair and discriminatory attracting the provisions of section 4(2)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter "Act"). It was urged that this amounted to abuse of dominant position by the Appellant. A complaint … of the Act and its mention in section 4 of the Act, which was not available in 2005. 53. In our opinion the reliance on the part of the Appellant on the opinion by the Board of … V.S. Sirpurkar, Chairman 1. In this judgment, we shall be dealing with Appeal Nos.
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRajasthan Cylinders and Containers Limited Vs. u.o.i and Anr
Supreme Court of India
Oct-01-2018
MRTP
indulged in cartilisation, thereby influencing and rigging the prices, thus, violating the provisions of Section 3(3)(d) of the Competition Act, 2002 (for short, the ‘Act’). The CCI, as a result, imposed severe penalties in the form of fines under … agencies, which include CCI and COMPAT, have to ensure that these objectives are fulfilled by curbing anti-competitive agreements.” 5370) The Court also mentioned, in particular, that competition leads to economic efficiency, economic growth and development as well … 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3546 OF2014RAJASTHAN CYLINDERS AND
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMonsanto Technology Llc and Ors. Vs.nuziveedu Seeds Limited & Ors.
Delhi
Mar-28-2017
MRTP
without prejudice to termination notice. CS (Comm) 132/2016 Page 50 of 96 65. The Parliament had enacted the Competition Act, 2002, some of the provisions of which came into force on 31.3.2003, its objective being to provide, keeping in … encoding said δ-endotoxin protein.‖ seed or plant cells containing [Claim nos.9 and 53 being directed to a plant tissue and claim nos.48 to 52 and … injunction CS (Comm) 132/2016 Page 1 of 96 under Rules 1 and 2 of Order XXXIX read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) has been made, by application (IA24062016), resulting in some … R. 4 CPC) MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC AND ORS. ..... PLAINTIFFS Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Sr. Advs. with Mr. Chander M. Lall,
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »