Co Developer - Judgment Search Results

Development Vs. Cesc Limited and anr.R

Court: Kolkata

alleged attempt on the part of the respondent no.1 to construct a sub-station in violation of the agreement dated June 13, Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTUR AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Petitioner Versus CESC LIMITED AND ANR. Respondents BEFORE: The Hon'ble

Rail Land Development Authority vs.parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr.

Court: Delhi

Page 14 of 22 18. The contention, that the Agreement could not be deemed to have been terminated because extensions of Transfer Date, provided that the Lease Premium paid by the Developer till the Transfer Date is more than the Distributions withdrawn

Rail Land Development Authority vs.parsvnath Developers Limited and An ...

Court: Delhi

can accrue to the respondents. Counsel for the appellant thus, contends that both the Arbitral Tribunal and the learned Single Judge forfeited. ARTICLE VII FINANCIAL CLOSE Financial Close 7.1 7.1.1 The Developer hereby agrees and undertakes that it shall achieve Financial Close

Parsvnath Developers Limited Vs. Rail Land Development Authority

Court: Delhi

General urges that the issues raised regarding not accepting existing company as Special Purpose Vehicle and of not extending the timelines Advocates. + W.P.(C) 5089/2012 & CM No.10421/2012 (u/S 15.CPC) PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate

Vgn Developers Pvt Ltd Vs. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority

Court: Chennai

be cited as a precedent as, in this order, this Court taken note of the peculiar facts and circumstances involved to S.No.123/1, Block No.21, Nungambakkam Village, Chennai applied by M/s. VGN Developers Pvt Ltd., No.15, Wallace Garden, 2nd Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai

Shiv Developers Thr. Sunilbhai Somabhai Ajmeri Vs. Aksharay Developers

Court: Supreme Court of India

Goel (supra) essentially related to the operation of the provision contained in Section 69(3) of the Act of 1932 and interpretation to the MOU were the partners of the firm Aksharay Developers and the MOU was being entered by virtue of the

Parsvnath Developers Limited Vs. Rail Land Development Authority

Court: Delhi

been accorded due consideration and thereupon it transpires that this Court while exercising writ jurisdiction would interfere in contractual matters, only to use an existing company, i.e, M/s. Parsvnath Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd. (PPDPL) as Special Purpose Vehicle for entering into

Marusha Engineers & Developers Pvt Ltd and Anr vs.delhi Development Au ...

Court: Delhi

made and the prayer for interim relief rejected. In our considered view, the learned Writ Court in doing so has not 12166/2018 Date of decision:16. h September, 2019 MARUSHA ENGINEERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD AND ANR ........ Petitioners versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

indore Development Authority, Indore Vs. Indore Development Authority ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: [2000(87)FLR57]; 2001(1)MPHT367

(1) clearly says that permanent employee is one who has completed six months satisfactory service in a clear vacancy in one Adhiniyam, 1973, State Government has made Rules knows as 'M.P. Development Authority Service (Officers and Servants) Recruitment Rules, 1987' (in short

National Dairy Development Board Vs. National Dairy Development Board ...

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: [1986(52)FLR609]; (1985)2GLR1415; (1986)ILLJ456Guj

heard the learned counsel of both the sides, we have come to the conclusion that there is no merit in any implementation, management information and economic analysis, manpower development, research and development and procurement of equipment and supplies. Project planning includes feasibility