Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: limitation act 1963 36 of 1963 section 5 extension of prescribed period in certain cases Court: mumbai Page 6 of about 303 results (0.066 seconds)

Mazda Construction Company and Others Vs. Sultanabad Darshan Chs Ltd. ...

Court : Mumbai

..... operative societies, mumbai city-3 and competent authority under section 5a of the maharashtra ownership of flats (regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) act, 1963 (for short mofa ), on an application bearing no.55/2011 has directed as under:- in exercise of the powers conferred on me under section 5a of the ..... by the competent authorities of the municipal corporation. the petitioner no.3 was, at the relevant time, chief promoter of the proposed sultanabad co-operative housing society limited. it is claimed by the petitioners that the layout was sub-divided into various plots under the scheme of subdivision approved by the municipal corporation. in the ..... terms of the provision, namely, section 3(2). it is a common ground that there were clauses which have been added to this provision by the maharashtra act 36 of 1986 whereas the agreement in this case is of prior year, namely, 1982. there are various particulars and it is further not disputed that the .....

Ashwin Crane and Construction and Another A partnership firm Vs. L and ...

Court : Mumbai

..... the court is called upon to decide the objections raised by a party against the arbitral award, the jurisdiction of the court is limited, as expressly indicated in section 34 of the act and it has no jurisdictions to sit in appeal and to examine the correctness of the award on merits with reference to the material ..... hire purchase agreement the petitioners were entitled to repossess the equipments/machineries and thus there was no question of the petitioners refusing to pay the balance installments. 36. in rejoinder the learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated their submissions and would submit that the petition be made absolute and the impugned award be set aside. ..... 12 of the hire purchase agreement the petitioners in case of default in payment of installment were liable to pay additional finance charges at the rate of 36% per annum. the learned arbitrator has awarded delayed payment charges at the agreed rate which cannot be challenged by the petitioners. it is submitted that the .....

D. Gowadia and Co. a Partnership Firm Registered Under the Indian Part ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(3)BomCR127

..... a.lr. 345 (supreme court) in the matter of union of india v. popular construction co. this case deals with the provisions of section 34(3) of the limitation act, 1963, section 5 and section 29(2) and after going through these provisions, the court has observed that the provisions of section 29(2) are not applicable to the proceedings ..... committed any error in entertaining the application for the restoration and the restoring the matter.13. the learned counsel appearing for the appellant relying upon section 36 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 has submitted that where the time for making an application to set aside the arbitral award under section 34 has expired, or such application ..... be stayed by this court in the interest of justice and therefore, we do not find any substance in the ground raised by the appellant relying upon section 36. and therefore, we reject the said submission of the said counsel.14. even though we are not in favour of the appellant and we are inclined to .....

Uco Bank, Churchgate Branch Through Mr. K. Venkatachalam Vs. Kanji Man ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(2)ALLMR512; 2008(3)BomCR290; (2008)110BOMLR744; 2008(4)MhLj424

..... , section 36 of the npa act states that the period of limitation as prescribed in the limitation act would be applicable. section 36 reads as under:36. limitation. no secured creditor shall be entitled to take all or any of the measures under subsection(4) of section 13, unless his claim in respect of the financial asset is made within the period of limitation prescribed under the limitation act, 1963 (36 of 1963).71 ..... . therefore, the legislature has made two different provisions for the borrower and the secured creditor so far as period of limitation is concerned. on a proper reading of the npa act and the drt act, we are unable to come to a conclusion that this indicates .....

Seemaben @ Shamuben Shankar Patel Adult alias inhabitant Vs. otibhai K ...

Court : Mumbai

..... counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit for account would include the suit for share in the partnership assets and would attract article 5 to the schedule of limitation act, 1963. it is submitted that the alleged partnership was executed on 1st march, 1996. the alleged deed of dissolution was executed on 16th march, 1999. the arbitration ..... will therefore follow that not only a claim for accounts and share of profits but also a claim for share in the assets of the dissolved partnership is timebarred. 36. the learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the kerala high court in the case of k. balakrishnan nair and anr. vs. k. gopalan nair, air ..... manner and that its decision is not actuated by any extraneous consideration. judicial approach in that sense acts as a check against flaws and faults that can render the decision of a court, tribunal or authority vulnerable to challenge. 36. in ridge v. baldwin, the house of lords was considering the question whether a watch committee .....

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Mahar ...

Court : Mumbai

..... in a situation where the reach of the non obstante clause in the later act is limited such as in the case of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 or in the case of the later act expressly yielding to the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985, as in the case of the recovery of debts due to banks ..... and had employed about 200 workers who would have been rendered jobless if the company was wound up. the appellant company had also borrowed about rs.52.36 lacs from sicom. taking into consideration the financial position of the company and the consequences that were likely to ensue, the government of maharashtra took action under ..... any binding effect inasmuch as it curtails the rights of the workman under the industrial disputes act and that act must prevail. in the premises, there is no conflict between the two acts and there is no question of repugnancy. (emphasis supplied) 36. in view of these authoritative pronouncements of the supreme court, we are unable to accept .....

Caribjet Inc. Vs. Air India Limited

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(3)ALLMR443; 2005(3)BomCR94; 2005(2)MhLj461

..... 1932, the plaint was handed to an officer in the prothonotary's office. in section 3 of the indian limitation act it is provided that 'every suit instituted after the period of limitation prescribed therefor by the first schedule shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been set up as a defence'. then, in explanation it is provided that 'a suit is ..... leave of the judge and the admission of the plaint does not affect in any way the presentation of the plaint for the purposes of the indian limitation act. that being so, i think that the decision of the learned judge is right and this suit was instituted within the period of ..... even lodging/filing/presentation of the plaint before the authorised officer of this court is impermissible. this issue directly fell for consideration in ramgopal chunilal v. ramsarup balevdas 1933(36) blr 84. the same judges constituted the division bench in this case which decided devidatt's case on which reliance was placed by mr. tulzapurkar. the chief justice .....

Ravji Khimji Chheda and Others Vs. Kesarben Laxmichand Dedhia and Othe ...

Court : Mumbai

..... the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period) of the indian limitation act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on 'merits'. the expression "sufficient cause" employed by the legislature is ..... court cases 448; (7) ravji khimji chheda and ors. vs. kesarben laxmichand dedhia and ors. chamber summons no.1649 of 2006 in arbitration petition no. 66 of 1991. 36. paragraph 6 of the judgment in case of sitalprasad saxena (supra) relied upon by the applicants reads thus:- 6. we heard mr. s.s. khanduja, learned counsel for ..... 4th march, 1964 and 3rd december, 1968, the original petitioner nos. 1 and 3 agreed to purchase land situate at peston sagar, chembur, admeasuring 132 acres and 36 gunthas. on 27th november, 1978 a suit (1562 of 1978) came to be filed by rustom dalal and others against union of india in respect of a larger .....

Eknath Daval Thete (since deceased) through his legal heirs Vs. Ganpat ...

Court : Mumbai

..... 1979 executed between the defendant no.1 and the defendant no.2 which was duly registered. learned counsel placed reliance on article 97 of the schedule to the limitation act, 1963. it is submitted that since the defendant no.2 was handed over possession of the suit lands by the defendant no.1 on the date of execution of ..... stay the suit till such determination was completed by such competent authority on decision of such competent authority was received by the court. 20. sections 36-a and 36-b of the fragmentation act read thus:- 36-a. bar of jurisdiction (1) no civil court or mamlatdar's courts shall have jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question ..... not be determined by a civil court. he submits that jurisdiction of the civil court is barred by law of limitation under section 36-a of the said fragmentation act. the only question is whether under the said fragmentation act, an owner is entitled to be in possession of the holding to which he is entitled to under the scheme. .....

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Others Vs. Ramesh Bhimrao Narayankar and ...

Court : Mumbai

..... ) of the meps rules, 1981, makes it clear that it does not disqualify an awardee teacher if he is above 65 years of age nor does rule 36 limits the association of an awardee teacher to only one enquiry committee at a time. if this be the position of law, we have no doubt that the clarification ..... word teacher is restricted to mean an in-service teacher. we have not been able to find any such restrictive or limited invariable use. therefore, everything depends on not just the text but the context. the act lays down the qualifications of the teachers, their scales of pay and allowances and their service conditions which it seeks to ..... of this judgment. 7. mr.n.v.bandiwadekar making the lead arguments invited our attention to the provisions of maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) regulation act, 1977 ( meps act for the sake of brevity) and maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) rules, 1981 ( meps rules for the sake of brevity). then he invited .....