Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.58 seconds)
M/S Shyamjee Prepaid Services vs M/S Top Steels on 18 January, 2023 cites

Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... vs Pratibha Industries Limited on 4 December, 2018

Suffice it to record that the decision of the Supreme Court in Pratibha Industries' case was dealing with a situation where the learned Signature Not Verified ARB.P. 137/2019 Page 22 of 29 Digitally Signed By:GAURAV SHARMA Signing Date:18.01.2023 18:21:48 NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2023/DHC/000376 Single Judge had exercised power of a Court because it was passed in an application filed under Section 9 of the Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 44 - R F Nariman - Full Document

M/S Jain Studios Limited Through Its ... vs Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd on 11 July, 2006

Furthermore, in its decision titled as Jain Studios Ltd. vs. Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd.; (2006) 5 SCC 501, the position with respect to breadth and depth of judicial review of orders passed under section 11 of the Act, 1996 is no longer res integra. The court‟s jurisdictional ability to review the orders under section 11 of the Act, 1996 has no influence whatsoever on substantive concerns or questions touching upon the merits of the case, such as the jurisdiction of a Tribunal or the validity of evidence.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 221 - C K Thakker - Full Document

State Of West Bengal vs Associated Contractors on 10 September, 2014

35. Thus, in light of the judgments and submissions referred above, it is imperative that the position with respect to review is clear. Conclusively, judicial review of Section 11 orders is no longer res integra. Courts can examine orders with procedural irregularities such wrong hearing dates, no notification, etc. Furthermore, the Courts' competence to review Section 11 orders is unaffected by substantive concerns like a Tribunal's jurisdiction or the authenticity of evidence. Issue iii: What is the scope of review and whether the present application seeking review of Order dated 2 nd September, 2019 be allowed?
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 42 - Cited by 195 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1   2 3 Next