Advanced Search Results

Tata Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Grasim Industries Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11, 11(6) and 11(12); Companies Act, 1956; LCIA Arbitration Rules

Reported in : AIR2008SC2970; 2008(3)ARBLR1(SC); 2008BusLR683(SC); (2008)4CompLJ220(SC); JT2008(7)SC575; (2008)7MLJ734(SC); 2008(9)SCALE717; (2008)10SCC187; 2008(2)LC825(SC); 2008AIRSCW5015; 2008(4)CivilLJ91

Advocate for Appellant : Harish N. Salve,; R.F. Nariman and; Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv

V.S. Sirpurkar, J.1. Two companies, first being M/s. Tata Industries Ltd., and the second being M/s. Apex Investments (Mauritius) Holding Private Limited (hereinafter referred to Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 respectively) have approached this Court under...

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Vs. Karam Chand Thapar and Bros. Pvt. Ltd. and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Civil

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 136 and 226; Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971; Coking Coal Mines (Natiolisation) Act, 1972 - Sections 2, 3, 6, 7, 7(1), 7(2) and 8; Mines Act, 1952

Reported in : JT2002(9)SC267; (2003)1SCC6

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Solicitor General,; Anip Sachthey and;

Banerjee, J.1. Leave granted.2. It is for the purposes of protecting, conserving and promoting scientific development of the resources of coking coal being a need to meet the growing requirements of iron and steel industry and...

Novartis Ag Vs. Wander Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 148 - Order 21, Rule 90 - Order 23, Rule 3; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 28

Reported in : AIR2005Delhi154; 114(2004)DLT625; 2004(77)DRJ520

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv.,; A. Salhotra,; Saurabh Kirpal,

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. By this application the defendant is seeking extension of time to perform certain obligations in respect of settlement between the parties dated 20th August, 2002 approved by this Court. It is not in...

Delhi Financial Corporation Vs. V.P. Puri and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Tenancy

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 12, Rule 6

Reported in : 2007(1)AWC618(SC); 2006(13)SCALE277

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv.,; Pinky Anand,; D.N. Goburdhan and

D.K. Jain, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to the order, dated 31.8.2006, passed by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, affirming the order passed by a learned Single Judge, whereby the application filed...

In Re: Jvg Leasing (Securities and Finance) Ltd. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : BankingCivil

Acts : Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Sections 17, 18, 45I, 45IA, 45IA(4), 45IA(3), 45IB,45IC, 45JA, 45MA, 45MB, 45MC, 45MC(4) and 45QA; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 58A, 58B, 391(1), 391(2), 393, 433 and 439; Reserve Bank (Amendment) Act, 1997 - Sections 45IA; Banking Regulation Act, 1949; Banking Laws (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1963; Companies (Amendment) Act, 1974; Price Chit and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978; Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 ; Reserve Bank of India (Amendment) Ordinance, 1997

Reported in : [2008]144CompCas780(Delhi); (2006)2CompLJ242(Del); [2007]79SCL541(Delhi)

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi and; Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advs., Shally Maheshwari,;

A.K. Sikri, J.1. Reserve Bank of India (in short the 'RBI') filed three winding up petitions against JVG Leasing Ltd. (CP No. 266/98), JVG Securities Ltd. (CP No. 267/98) and JVG Finance Ltd. (CP No. 265/98)...

Bank of Baroda Vs. SadruddIn Hasan Daya and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Contempt of Court

Acts : Bombay High Court (O.S.) Rules - Rule 314; Recovery of Debts due to Banks and financial Institutions Act, 1993 - Sections 17, 18 and 25; Contempt of Courts Act - Sections 2 and 20

Reported in : 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)1007; 2004(2)AWC1450(SC); 97(2004)CLT581(SC); [2004]118CompCas241(SC); JT2005(6)SC149; 2003(10)SCALE681; (2004)1SCC360; AIR2004SC942

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Solicitor General and; Indu Malhotra, Adv

G.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition has been preferred by Bank of Baroda for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents; Sadruddin Hasan Daya and Shohin S. Daya. The facts leading to the filing of the contempt petition...

Commissioner of Customs, Kolkatta Vs. Grand Prime Limited and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 28, 111, 113, 114 and 124; Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 - Sections 2(33), 3 and 3(1)

Reported in : AIR2003SC2708; 2003(88)ECC449; 2002LC329(SC); 2003(155)ELT417(SC); JT2003(5)SC259; 2003(5)SCALE166; (2003)5SCC762

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Soliciter General,; N.K. Bajpai,; A.

Arun Kumar, J.1. These appeals are directed against the order of the Customs Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') dated 20th November, 2000. By the impugned order the Tribunal allowed...

State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Jaspal Kaur

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Reported in : [2007(112)FLR1037]; [2007(2)JCR200(SC)]; JT2007(3)SC35; (2007)2LLJ385SC; (2007)5MLJ396; (2007)146PLR754; 2007(2)SCALE397; (2007)9SCC571; 2007(3)SLJ1(SC); 2007(1)LC0247(SC)

Advocate for Appellant : Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv.,; Sanjay Kapur,; Shubhra Kapur,;

A.R. Lakshmanan, J.1. Leave granted.2. On 07.08.1996, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, issued guidelines regarding scheme of appointment of dependents of deceased employees on compassionate grounds, which were entirely based on the observations of...

S.C. Dubey Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Labour and IndustrialConstitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 86(2000)DLT523

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Senior Advocate and; Mr.C. Mukund, Adv

ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. The second respondent is a public sector undertaking engaged in the manufacture of electronic instruments and manufacture of colour TVs and engaged in other activities with reference to electronics. The Headquarters of...

Modi Rubber Ltd. Vs. Guardian International Corp.

Court : Delhi

Subject : SICA

Acts : Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Sections 16 and 18; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 82; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 6, 6.1, 9, 11, 17, 18, 19 to 24, 25 and 36; Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 27, 32, 39 and 56; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 10, 14, 14(1), 16, 21, 23, 41, 41(1) and 42; Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 18, 20 and 41; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 148A - Order 38, Rule 5 - Order 39; LCIA Rules; Constitution of India - Articles 16 and 226

Reported in : 2007(2)ARBLR133(Delhi); 141(2007)DLT822

Advocate for Appellant : Arun Jaitley, Sr. Adv.,; D.S. Narula,; Anis Sharma and;

Gita Mittal, J.1. This petition raises two very interesting questions which are required to be answered. The first question raised is whether a party can seek interim relief on the ground that the other side has...