Tag: supreme court

No Contrary View Can Be taken by Labour Court Once Order of Termination approved by the Industrial Tribunal: Supreme Court

Monday October 31, 2022. BY Mr. Chitrang Gamot and Ms.Nidhi Singh | Blog

The Hon’ble Supreme Court recently held that the order passed by Industrial Tribunal.1 is binding. The views of Industrial Tribunal being higher forum attains finality and no contrary view can be taken by the Labour

Limitation period for filing applications under I&B Code

Friday September 23, 2022. BY Madhura Rane, Umang Shirodariya | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Tech Sharp Engineers Private Limited v. Sanghvi Movers Limited (Civil Appeal No. 296 of 2020), on September 19, 2022, held “a claim may not be barred by limitation, it is

Resolution Plan that fails to address Statutory Dues is bound to be rejected by the Adjudicating Authority: Supreme Court

Thursday September 15, 2022. BY | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

The Hon’ble Division Bench, Supreme Court comprising of Justice Indira Banerjee, and Justice A.S. Bopanna, in State Tax Officer (1) v. Rainbow Papers Limited (Civil Appeal No. 1664 of 2020), on 6th September, 2022, held that a

The Holder of the Recovery Certificate would be a Financial Creditor and would be entitled to initiate CIRP: Supreme Court

Monday June 6, 2022. BY | Insolvency & Bankruptcy

A Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and A.S. Bopanna, in Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. A. Balakrishna and Anr (Civil Appeal No. 689 of 2021), affirmed the view taken in

india law

DUOMATIC PRINCIPLE, HOW IT CAN BE ESTABLISHED?

Monday May 23, 2022. BY | Commercial/Corporate

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Vineet Saran and JK Maheshwari held in a recent judgment1 that the Duomatic Principle is applicable even in the Indian context which states that ‘Strict adherence to a statutory

ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CAN NOT ORDER INTERIM DEPOSIT OF DISPUTED AMOUNT, WHERE THE LIABILITY IS IN DISPUTE: Supreme Court

Wednesday May 4, 2022. BY | Arbitration and Conciliation

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna held, in a recent judgment1 Arbitral Tribunal (“Tribunal”) cannot pass an interim order under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12