Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (3.38 seconds)

Jackie Kukubhai Shroff vs Ratnam Sudesh Iyer on 19 May, 2020

That Petitioner's reliance on judgment of this Court in Jackie Kakubhai Shroff (supra) is misplaced as the ample evidence is available on record and analized by the Arbitral Tribunal for upholding the claim of Respondent in respect of bank guarantee. That even otherwise, if the bank guarantee is wrongfully invoked on the pretext of breach of contractual obligations and if Arbitral Tribunal has arrived at the conclusion that there is no breach of contract by Respondent, sanction of claim relating to bank guarantee would be in the nature of restitution and not by way of liquidated damages. That in such circumstances there is no requirement of proof of cause of loss to the Respondent. Mr. Trivedi would accordingly pray for dismissal of the Arbitration Petition.
Bombay High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 1 - S C Gupte - Full Document

Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... vs The B.E.S.T. Workers' Union on 12 January, 1973

28. It is well-settled position of law that a judgment is an authority for what it decides and not what can be logically deducible therefrom. Reference in this regard to the judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. vs. The B.E.S.T. Workers Union4 would be apposite. Paragraphs 19, 20, and 21 of the judgment read as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 20 - A Alagiriswami - Full Document

Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. vs Richardson And Cruddas (1972) Ltd. And ... on 2 September, 1996

15. So far as reliance by Petitioner on judgment of this Court in Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. (supra) is concerned, Mr. Trivedi would submit that the ratio of the said judgment was only with regard to injunctive relief. This Court has decided only the issue of injuncting katkam Page No. 8 of 24 ::: Uploaded on - 16/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/12/2025 21:58:26 ::: k 9/24 31 carbp 26.24 os.doc the parties from invocation of bank guarantee in absence of cause of any loss. That the judgment cannot be cited in the present case where the facts are clearly distinguishable.
Bombay High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Secunderabad Club vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 5 March, 2002

21. In the context of understanding a judgment, it is well settled that the words used in a judgment are not to be interpreted as those of a statute. This is because the words used in a judgment should be rendered and understood contextually and are not intended to be taken literally. Further, a decision is not an authority for what can be read into it by implication or by assigning an assumed intention of the judges and inferring from it a proposition of law which the judges have not specifically or expressly laid down in the pronouncement. In other words, the decision is an authority for what it specifically decides and not what can logically be deduced therefrom.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 Next