Held that Manual issued by the Government suggesting settlement of dispute by arbitration would not amount to execution of arbitration agreement between the parties. Application u/s 11(4) & 11(6) dismissed as no arbitration agreement exists between the parties.
Held that the machine and two DG sets are under seal for more than two years. The impugned action of the department is wholly without jurisdiction for which the petitioner is liable to be compensated
Held that as per the reply notice, the petitioner has waived the right to settle the dispute in an arbitration proceedings. Accordingly, if the right is once waived it cannot be allowed to be reclaimed.
Held that right to file the application u/s 8(1) of A&C Act, after the statutory period to file the written statement, is closed
Held that as summoning of the petitioners by the respondents would not amount to taking any coercive steps like arresting them or prosecuting them, but only to proceed forward with the investigation. Such summons not contrary to the provisions of Cr.P.C.
Court is of the view that it was an impossible situation for the respondents to have paid the lease rentals timely, particularly during the period covered by the claim of the applicants. In the circumstances, the present is not a fit case where the parties should be referred to arbitration
B.C.Mohankumar Vs Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax (Madras High Court) Order for non-granting GST registration must be a speaking order The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of M/s B.C. Mohan Kumar v Superintendent of Central Goods & Service Tax [W.P. No. 13272 and WMP. Nos. 12569 & 12571 dated June 16, […]
Midland Microfin Ltd. Vs Union of India and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court) Whether at this stage of notice under Section 148, writ Court should venture into the merits of the controversy when AO is yet to frame assessment/reassemment in discharge of statutory duty casted upon him under Section 147 of the Act Admittedly […]
Smt. Sandipa Gupta (Bhowmick) @ Sandipa Bhowmick Vs Sri Suraj Gupta (Calcutta High Court) Admittedly, the husband has filed a Matrimonial Suit against the petitioner/wife for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The wife is now residing with her widow mother at Siliguri which is at a distance of more than 100 kilometers from Coochbehar. […]
Settled legal position is that in order for a shape trademark to be registered, it has to be shown that the said shape is not the generic shape of the product. It has to be a distinctive shape that associates the mark with the source by itself without anything further like a name or logo appended on it.
