Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.32 seconds)

Signature Not Verified Digitally ... vs In Item Nos. 89, 100 & 101. Mr. Uday Bedi, ... on 16 March, 2023

40. The Hon'ble Delhi HC in the case Cosmol Energy Private Limited Vs Anil Kumar Pitti (CS(Comm) 414/2024) decided on 10.02.2025 has held that the counter claim and the civil suit can not be held to be on equal footing CS (Comm) No. 649/2022 Punjab National Bank Vs. Ms. Charu Goel CS (COMM) 10/24 Ms. Charu Goel Vs. Punjab National Bank & Anr. Page No.24 of 39 and therefore, the civil suits have to comply with mandatory requirement of PIMS as provided in Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act. The facts of the said case were such that the civil suit was filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 3,80,69,259/- along with interest. The plaintiff had also filed an application under section 12A of the Act to exempt him from complying with the provision of PIMS. Before the institution of the present suit, the defendant had also filed an application to refer to matter between the parties to mediation. Thus, the plaintiff has argued that there is no mandatory requirement to comply with PIMS, as the matter was already referred to mediation and a fresh PIMS was not mandated.
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 143 - V Bakhru - Full Document

Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd vs Regency Convention Centra & Hotels & Ors on 6 July, 2010

In this regard, it is relevant to refer to case of Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Regency Convention Centre & Hotels AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 3109 wherein, it was held that "A 'necessary party' is a person who ought to CS (Comm) No. 649/2022 Punjab National Bank Vs. Ms. Charu Goel CS (COMM) 10/24 Ms. Charu Goel Vs. Punjab National Bank & Anr. Page No.33 of 39 have been joined as a party and in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the Court".
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 432 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1   2 Next