The Supreme Court in Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM Vs. E.S. Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., dated 03.05.21 held that “The duty of the Court is not to delve deep into the intricies of human mind to explore the undisclosed intention, but only to...
The Supreme Court in Asha John Divinathan Vs. Vikram Malhotra & ors., on 26.02.21 held that “From the analysis of Section 31 of the 1973 Act and upon conjoint reading with Sections 47, 50 and 63 of the same Act, we must hold that the requirement of taking...
The Supreme Court, while deciding the issue that whether the period of limitation for filing the Petition under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act would commence from the date on which the draft award was circulated to the parties, or the date on which the...
The Supreme Court reiterated that “In our view, having due regard to the nature and ambit of Section 311 of the CrPC, it was appropriate and proper that the applications filed by the prosecution ought to have been allowed. Section 311 provides that any Court may, at...
The Supreme Court held while hearing an appeal against the order of quashing the FIR by the High Court that “We are unable to appreciate the reasoning that the provision incorporated in the agreement for referring the disputes to arbitration is an effective substitute...
The Supreme Court held that “Since the corporate debtor would be covered by the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 of the IBC, by which continuation of Section 138/141 proceedings against the corporate debtor and initiation of Section 138/141 proceedings...
Recent Comments