In present facts of the case, while allowing the appeal it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that non-disclosure of the relevant and material documents with a view to obtain an undue advantage would amount to fraud and the judgment or decree obtained by fraud is to be treated as a nullity.
In the present case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the Writ under Article 32 would be maintainable as after the Apex Court, no litigant has any opportunity of approaching any higher forum to question its decision. The only remedy available to the petitioners would be to approach this Court by way of writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for protection of the fundamental rights (Right to Privacy in this case) of citizens of India.
In present matter, the Honble Supreme Court observed that once the order of termination was approved by the Industrial Tribunal on appreciation of evidence led before it, thereafter the findings recorded by the Industrial Tribunal were binding between the parties and no contrary view could have been taken by the Labour Court contrary to the findings recorded by the Industrial Tribunal.
The Orders of the Registrar of Companies cannot be altered after 16 years of the declaration of the Company as defunct especially when the Complainant has no locus standi as he is neither a Company, nor a member and nor a creditor, hence he cannot be said to be a person aggrieved to question the Order of RoC is striking off the Companys name under Section 560(5) of the Companies Act, 1956.
In present case, the Honble Supreme Court invoked the provision of Article 142 of the Constitution of India and reduced the rate of Interest awarded by the arbitral tribunal by considering the fact that the long duration has been passed since filing of the claim.
In present case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Respondent in this case shall not be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground on the death of her father, who died in the year 1995. If such an appointment is made now, the same shall be against the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided.
In present case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court enhanced the Compensation under Motor Vehicles Act, by considering the income of the deceased under the heads of Income from Business and other investments and Income from Property and Agricultural Land as the deceased was having specialized skills in administering the business and was having good managerial skills.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble NCLT while taking into consideration the Interlocutory Application u/s. 60(5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, have observed that moratorium under Section 14 would not be applicable to the properties wherein the possession of the Corporate Debtor is unlawful
Ganpat Pannalal Vs State Bank of India (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Conclusion: In the said case, the Hon’ble High Court while remanding the case to the Tribunal observed that the Tribunal under Section 22(1)(g) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 was competent to restore the Securitization Application by imposition of reasonable cost […]
CESTAT held that ‘Explanation’ added to definition of ‘exempted service’ would widen the scope of the provision and will have prospective effect and cannot be applied retrospectively.
