Union of India Vs U.A.E. Exchange Centre (Supreme Court) Respondent was not carrying on any business activity in India as such, but only dispensing with the remittances by downloading information from the main server of respondent in UAE and printing cheques/drafts drawn on the banks in India as per the instructions given by the NRI […]
Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia Vs Dhiraj Prasad Sahu & Dhiraj Sahu Anr. (Supreme Court) In the present case, it would be significant to add that it is not necessary to make a declaration incompatible in the use of the word ‘date’ with the general rule of law since the word ‘date’ is quite capable of meaning […]
Despite the Guidelines and SOPs issued, for lack of implementation the Pandemic has spread like wild fire. A strict and stern action should be taken against those who are violating the Guidelines and SOPs, whoever he may be and whatever position the violator is occupying.
Deputy Conservator Of Forests Vs. Timblo Irmaos Ltd. & Ors. (Supreme Court) The law on Delay Condonation does not differentiate between Government & private party- Mst. Katiji & Ors., AIR 1987 SC 1353 out dated due to technological advancements. The Apex Court has been repeatedly reiterating that the Government cannot take the plea of differential […]
Union Of India Vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd. & Ors. (Supreme Court) Hon’ble Supreme Court has stayed Delhi High Court Order in the case of Bharti Airtel Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. by which High Court allowed Form GSTR-3B rectification. Matter will list in the first week of March, 2021 for final disposal. Earlier […]
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs Raghbendra Singh & Ors. (Supreme Court) Supreme Court held that gratuity money of an employee can be withheld and forfeited in case of recovery of dues such as overstaying in official accommodation. FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT We have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and […]
It was held that Where a company has been dissolved, such dissolution may be set aside within a period of two years from the date of such dissolution under section 356 of the Companies Act, 2013.
SC held that Ola and Uber did not facilitate cartelization or anti-competitive practices between drivers as the drivers were independent individuals who acted independently of each other, therefore, section 3 of the CCI Act would not apply.
Vidya Drolia And Others Vs Durga Trading Corporation (Supreme Court of India) Section 43(1) of the Arbitration Act states that the Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply to arbitrations as it applies to court proceedings. Sub-section (2) states that for the purposes of the Arbitration Act and Limitation Act, arbitration shall be deemed to have commenced […]
DLF Home Developers Ltd. Vs Capital Greens Flat Buyers Association Etc. (Supreme Court of India) Supreme Court has upheld the findings of the NCDRC to hold that the “delay in the approval of building plans is a normal incident of a construction project. A developer in the position of the appellant would be conscious of […]
