Novartis v. Aventis Pharma
Arb Petn No. 763 of 2009
Bombay High court
Monday, September 20, 2010
arbitration, foreign award and letters patent
Clause 10 of LPA (Delhi)
Since order enforcing foreign award within meaning of Ss. 44,47 of Arbitration Act, 1996 does not in categories specified in Section 50 of the 1996 Act - Cl. 10 LPA is not maintainable.
AIR 2010 Del 135
Since order enforcing foreign award within meaning of Ss. 44,47 of Arbitration Act, 1996 does not in categories specified in Section 50 of the 1996 Act - Cl. 10 LPA is not maintainable.
AIR 2010 Del 135
Jurisdiction cannot be conferred by arbitration clause
Parties cannot confer jurisdiction on Court by agreement which it does not possess. Said clause would be void and hit by Section 28.
AIR 2010 Guj 843 (NOC)
(There is a Delhi HC decision also)
AIR 2010 Guj 843 (NOC)
(There is a Delhi HC decision also)
Friday, September 3, 2010
Scheme of Arrangement Voting
Votes with conditions atached not to be counted - 2002 111 Comp Cas 118 (Guj)
Friday, August 27, 2010
Cheque bounce not for signature mismatch
Mustafa Surka - vs State Of Gujarat
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1874147/
11. In the instant case, there is no dispute about the endorsement that "drawers signature differs from the specimen supplied" and/or "no image found-signature" and/or "incomplete signature / illegible" and for return/dishonour of cheque on the above endorsement will not attract ingredients of Section 138 of the Act and insufficient fund as a ground for doshonouring cheque cannot be extended so as to cover the endorsement "signature differed from the specimen supplied" or likewise. If the cheque is returned/bounced/dishonoured on the endorsement of "drawers signature differs from the specimen supplied" and/or "no image found-signature" and/or "incomplete signature / illegible", the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Act is not maintainable. Hence, a case is made out to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in favour of the petitioner.
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1874147/
11. In the instant case, there is no dispute about the endorsement that "drawers signature differs from the specimen supplied" and/or "no image found-signature" and/or "incomplete signature / illegible" and for return/dishonour of cheque on the above endorsement will not attract ingredients of Section 138 of the Act and insufficient fund as a ground for doshonouring cheque cannot be extended so as to cover the endorsement "signature differed from the specimen supplied" or likewise. If the cheque is returned/bounced/dishonoured on the endorsement of "drawers signature differs from the specimen supplied" and/or "no image found-signature" and/or "incomplete signature / illegible", the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Act is not maintainable. Hence, a case is made out to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in favour of the petitioner.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Section 62 - Damages - Sale of Goods - Freedom to contract - conditions
MANU/GJ/0642/2004 - Suraj Enterprises
MANU/MH/0300/2000 - MSEB v. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.
MANU/MH/0085/1958: AIR 1958 Bom 291.
MANU/KA/0020/1958 : AIR 1958 Kant 10 - KCN Gowda v. Molakram Tekchand
distinction between conditions implied by law and conditions provided by contract
MANU/MH/0300/2000 - MSEB v. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.
MANU/MH/0085/1958: AIR 1958 Bom 291.
MANU/KA/0020/1958 : AIR 1958 Kant 10 - KCN Gowda v. Molakram Tekchand
distinction between conditions implied by law and conditions provided by contract
Appointment of Provisional Liquidator - Factors to be considered
Darshan Anilkumar Patel v. Gitaneel Hotel Pvt Ltd, [1994] 81 Comp Cases 805
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)