Madhya Pradesh High Court allows fresh adjudication on limitation issue in Arbitration appeal
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the Trial Court failed to properly adjudicate the issue related to calculation of limitation period.
limitation
Explained| SAT order directing SEBI to refund Rs. 25 crore penalty deposited by Reliance for violating SAST Regulations
There is no such thing under the SAST Regulations that acquisition and holding of shares without making a public announcement is a violation.
Does Section 14(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 completely bar institution of suit within 5 years? SC answers
Supreme Court held that not putting a quietus to the prolonged dispute at hand, spanning 38 years, on something as simple as tenancy issue, would be a travesty of justice.
[SANGEETHA v NEW SANGEETHA] Exception of bona fide use of name as trade mark does not extend to the name of spouse: Madras High Court grants permanent injunction
Madras High Court has also granted the plaintiff a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from committing passing off of its restaurant business by using deceptively similar trade mark.
[Condonation of Delay] Filing of claim under wrong category is not substantial ground for condoning delay: NCLAT
The NCLAT rejected an application seeking Condonation of Delay of 49 days (about 1 and a half months) on the ground of want of sufficient cause.
Can assessee take total contract value and remit service tax on value as ‘works contract service’? Supreme Court answers
As the service tax needs to be computed in terms of Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and as the assessee has not opted for the composition scheme, the matter is remitted back to the CESTAT for re-computation of the demands.
Can time limit for filing written statement be extended? Calcutta High Court explains
The Calcutta High Court observed that “conduct of the defendant is also to be looked into” and accepted the written statement of the defendant.
Seeking appointment of Arbitrator beyond three years is barred by limitation: Supreme Court reiterates
Supreme Court said that whether any particular facts constitute a cause of action has to be determined with reference to the facts of each case and with reference to the substance, rather than the form of the action. If an infringement of a right happens at a particular time, the whole cause of action will be said to have arisen then and there.
Section 15 of HMA does not make any distinction between a contested decree and an ex parte decree; Delhi High Court upholds second marriage of husband
Delhi High Court observed that an ex parte decree of divorce also it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again if no appeal is filed against such decree within the period of limitation.
Meghalaya High Court| Governor has residuary power to carve out authority already conferred under 6th Schedule and vest the same in some other Court or officer
Meghalaya High Court said that there is no limitation on the powers of the Governor in conferring a part of the authority pertaining to the Penal Code or some special law, to a particular Court or officer appointed in that behalf.
Specific Relief| Supreme Court shows dismay over Trial Court & Telagana HC’s orders allowing “hopelessly delayed” application seeking extension of time filed after 853 days; sets aside order
The Supreme Court was unimpressed with the explanation given by the plaintiff for the delay of 853 days that he initially fell sick with Jaundice and was later confined to house with High Blood Pressure, Diabetes and other diseases. The petition had extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/-.
Madras High Court| Non-signatories can join as parties to arbitral proceedings, if they are the ‘alter ego’ of the signatory
Madras High Court held that the petitioners are not entitled to join respondents 3 to 5 as parties to arbitral proceedings, as they do not qualify as “alter egos” of the first respondent or as successors-in-interest.
NCLAT | IBC overrides Limitation Act; Delay beyond period of 45 days cannot be condoned
While adjudicating an appeal file with a delay of 55 days, the Tribunal held that S. 238 IBC overrides S. 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and therefore this Tribunal does not have power to condone a delay beyond a period of 45 days.
Bombay High Court| Procedure of constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal is overshadowed by MSMED Act, but does not eclipse the agreement between parties in case of exclusive jurisdiction
Bombay High Court: In a petition filed by Gammon Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd. under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996
Limitation in Filing Appeal before the NCLAT — Interesting Development
by Akaant Kumar Mittal†
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 8
Haryana Court | Right to earn in consideration of work done under an employment is an essence covered by Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Vikrant J. recorded that when the benefit of two ACPs was granted to the plaintiff after the completion of 10 and 20 years of service respectively, there is no justification for not granting him the benefit of 3rd ACP after the completion of 30 years of satisfactory service before retirement.
‘Time period of 6 months for filing Motor Accident Claim must be calculated from the date of accident’; Kerala High Court interprets “month”
Kerala High Court while dealing with the issue of limitation for filing claim petition, considered the months and not days from the date of accident, for calculating the limitation period.
Madras High Court dismisses contempt proceedings against presiding officer of family Court; Imposes Rs. 50,000 costs on the petitioner
Madras High Court held that the contempt petition is not maintainable and barred by limitation. Thus, dismissed contempt proceedings against the presiding officer of Family Court as he was not the presiding officer when the order was passed.