Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.61 seconds)
Documents citing South Eastern Coalfields Limited vs Ashok Kumar Thakur 8 Wpl/223/2017 ... on 6 March, 2020

M/S New Jeewan Bus Service vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 May, 2022

decided on 14.10.2014, Whirlpool Corporation Vs. The Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors. (AIR 1999 SC 22), Union of India and Anr. Vs. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. 2012 (11) SCC 691, WPT No.63 of 2012 (Ms. Mahadev Transport Service Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors) decided on 8th July 2013, Surguja Raigarh Roadways (Pvt.) Ltd., Ambikapur Vs. The Tax Officer (RTO), Bilaspur & Ors. 1973 MPLJ 1019, Bharat Bushan -5- Chawla Vs. The State of MP (AIR 1993 MP 241), Sobhagmal Kamriya Vs. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Raj. 07), WP No. 4620 of 2005 (South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.Co. Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh, Sharat Kumar Barpanda Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (AIR 2017 CG 15).
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S New Jeewan Bus Service vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 May, 2022

decided on 14.10.2014, Whirlpool Corporation Vs. The Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors. (AIR 1999 SC 22), Union of India and Anr. Vs. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. 2012 (11) SCC 691, WPT No.63 of 2012 (Ms. Mahadev Transport Service Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors) decided on 8th July 2013, Surguja Raigarh Roadways (Pvt.) Ltd., Ambikapur Vs. The Tax Officer (RTO), Bilaspur & Ors. 1973 MPLJ 1019, Bharat Bushan -5- Chawla Vs. The State of MP (AIR 1993 MP 241), Sobhagmal Kamriya Vs. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1997 Raj. 07), WP No. 4620 of 2005 (South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.Co. Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh, Sharat Kumar Barpanda Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (AIR 2017 CG 15).
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Central Coalfields Limited vs M/S Aretpl-At(Jv) on 4 July, 2022

In support of the aforesaid submissions, Mr. A.K. Das, the learned counsel for the CCL has referred to the judgments in "Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v. AMR Dev Prabha" (2020) 16 SCC 759, "South Eastern Coalfields Limited v. S. Kumar's Associates AKM (JV)" (2021) 9 SCC 166, "Central Coalfields Limited v. SLL-SML (Joint Venture Consortium)" (2016) 8 SCC 622, "South Delhi Municipal Corpn. v. Ravinder Kumar" (2015) 15 SCC 545, "Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corpn. v. Diamond & Gem Development Corpn. Ltd." (2013) 5 SCC 470, "Satish Batra v. Sudhir Rawal" (2013) 1 SCC 345, "Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Limited v. Vardan Linkers" (2008) 12 SCC 500 and "Global Energy Ltd. v. Adani Exports Ltd." (2005) 4 SCC 435.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Reserved On: 26.8.2025 vs Sudha Thakur on 8 September, 2025

11. Mr. Ashwani to K. Sharma, Advocate, representing the defendant/appellant would r learned Senior contend that in absence of any concluded contract between the parties to pay the rent, fixation of liability against the defendant/appellant was perverse and against the law. He would submit that the terms of LOI could not be considered to be binding on the defendant. The defendant was justified in not executing the lease deed in favour of the plaintiff for the reasons that the land did not comply with the requirements of defendant company. He placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dresser Rand S.A. vs. Bindal Agro Chem Ltd & another, 2006 (1) SCC 751 and South Eastern Coalfields Ltd vs. S. Kumar's Associates AKM (JV) to ::: Downloaded on - 08/09/2025 21:30:55 :::CIS -7- assert that the terms of LOI could not be construed as concluded contract between the parties.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1