Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Court: mumbai Year: 2015 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.028 seconds)

Apr 08 2015 (HC)

POL India Projects Limited and Another Vs. Aurelia Reederei Eugen Frie ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-08-2015

..... rate of 5.5% per annum compounded at three monthly from 24th october, 2008 to the date of payment. 12. in the meanwhile, the respondents filed an application under section 9 of the arbitration act in this court (arbitration petition no.524 of 2011) for interim measures. the said arbitration petition ..... the parties, the deed of guarantee and also the order passed by this court in arbitration petition no.524 of 2011. 16. on 12th september, 2008, the petitioners informed the broker of the respondents that the petitioners were acting only as brokers for and on behalf of the said d.b. ..... the english arbitration act. in my view, the reliance placed on the judgment of this court in case of oil and natural gas corporation ltd. (supra) is thus totally misplaced. 123. in so far as judgment of this court in case of jimmy construction pvt. ltd.,nagpur (supra)(2008) 3 mah. ..... act if the jurisdictional or declaratory award is not challenged within the time prescribed before the appropriate court, such award becomes final and the party looses right to challenge said award in future. the reliance placed by the learned counsel on the judgment of this court in case of jimmy construction pvt. ltd.,nagpur (supra)(2008 ..... recognised. even if as between two contracting parties the title may pass, while exercising the discretion under sec. 20 of the specific relief act, court will have to consider whether it should be a party to a transaction for which permission is not obtained from the reserve bank of india .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 2015 (HC)

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited Vs. Vijai E ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-04-2015

..... of a particular government. (see state of rajasthan v. basant nahata: (2005) 12 scc 77].) in dda v. r.s. sharma and co. (2008) 13 scc 80, the court summarized the law thus: 21. from the above decisions, the following principles emerge: (a) an award, which is (i) contrary to substantive provisions of ..... paras 85, 95). when it came to construing the expression "the public policy of india" contained in section 34(2)(b)(ii) of the arbitration act, 1996, this court in ongc v. saw pipes 2003 (5) scc 705, held- 31. therefore, in our view, the phrase "public policy of india" used in ..... the head "fundamental policy of indian law". it has already been seen from the renusagar judgment that violation of the foreign exchange act and disregarding orders of superior courts in india would be regarded as being contrary to the fundamental policy of indian law. to this it could be added that the ..... , one graduate engineer, one junior engineer, one accountant, one storekeeper and supervisor and one mechanic at the site and had also deployed watch and ward. details of the persons employed have been listed in annexure-n to the statement of claim and the documents filed to establish the same would evidence ..... right, exercise of which was being fettered. there is no term in the contract which is contrary to the provisions of the indian contract act. the indian contract act merely provides that a person can withdraw his offer before its acceptance. but withdrawal of an offer, before it is accepted, is a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2015 (HC)

CMC Limited Vs. Unit Trust of India

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-06-2015

..... award shows patent illegality on the face of the award and being contrary to the terms of the contract, contrary to law laid down by the supreme court and this court, the provisions of the limitation act, 1963 and also being contrary to and overlooking the pleadings and the evidence filed by both the parties, the impugned award deserves to be set-aside ..... final award dated 3rd november 2009 in this petition. the respondent raised a preliminary objection about maintainability of the arbitration petition in so far as the order dated 7th february 2008 passed by the arbitral tribunal rejecting prayers 'f' and 'g' are concerned. 17. learned counsel for the petitioner fairly admitted that the arbitration petition under section 34 of the said ..... tribunal. the said counter claim was resisted by the respondent on various grounds including limitation and arbitrability. 16. by a separate order passed by the arbitral tribunal on 7th february 2008, it is held that the arbitral tribunal has the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the respondent's counter claims prayed in prayers 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e' and 'h' of the ..... act for impugning the order dated 7th february 2008 passed under section 16 of the said act in respect of rejection of claim 'f' and 'g' is not maintainable. the arbitral tribunal framed eight points for determination. 18. the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2015 (HC)

Punj Lloyd Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-24-2015

..... of the contract is not liable to pay compensation and it would be against the specific provisions of section 73 and 74 of the indian contract act. the supreme court held that in the said clause, it was specifically mentioned that it was agreed genuine pre estimate of the damages duly agreed by the parties. ..... to the petitioner, the said completion certificate dated 1st march 2008 issued by the said eil would indicate that the petitioner had completed the activities in terms of clause 3 of the dloa in respect of both spreads ..... the petitioner that in response to the request of the petitioner, the said eil issued a copy of the completion certificate to the petitioner on 1st march 2008. in the said letter, the said eil recorded that it had sent to the respondent the said certificate along with final bill of the petitioner. according ..... i and ii within the respective extended completion dates. 33. on 15th september 2008, the petitioner issued to the respondent a notice under article 14 of the general conditions of contract to commence arbitration. on 14th october ..... 2008, the respondent appointed shri. r. krishnan, a retired officer of the respondent as the sole arbitrator. 34. pursuant to the directions issued by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2015 (HC)

Seemaben @ Shamuben Shankar Patel Adult alias inhabitant Vs. otibhai K ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-10-2015

..... vital evidence in arriving at its decision, such decision would necessarily be perverse and can be set aside under section 34 of the said arbitration act. the supreme court in the said judgment has not decided contrary to its earlier judgment in the case of oil and natural gas corporation ltd. vs. western geco ..... limitation was raised by the petitioner in the application filed by the respondents for appointment of the arbitrator under section 11 of the said act filed in this court. the parties, by consent, had referred the disputes enumerated in the order to the learned arbitrator for adjudication without reserving any liberty to ..... law that a decision which is perverse or so irrational that no reasonable person would have arrived at the same will not be sustained in a court of law. perversity or irrationality of decisions is tested on the touchstone of wednesburyprinciple of reasonableness. decisions that fall short of the standards of ..... ,947/- towards the arrears of maintenance and the repair funds. on 31.07.2008, the petitioner paid a sum of rs.40,947/- and rs.40,000/- by two separate cheques to the society. the society issued two receipts ..... the petitioner entered into a leave and licence agreement with said babubhai k. patel on 25.01.2008 for a period of 24 months i.e. upto 31.01.2010. in the month of may, 2008 the said jai pragati co-operative housing society ltd. demanded from the petitioner a sum of rs.80 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2015 (HC)

Pranda Jewelry Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Aarya 24 kt and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-01-2015

..... a piece of art. in fact, it has no independent existence of itself ? . when the matter went before the division bench of that court, the court put the matter thus: ??36. this clearly shows that the legislature intended that even if the artistic work such as a painting has been used ..... the adoption of the mark was itself dishonest ? . in express bottlers services pvt. ltd. vs. pepsi inc. (1989 (7) ptc 14), the court held as follows: ??.........mere delay in taking action against the infringers is not sufficient to hold that the registered proprietor has lost the mark intentionally unless it ..... being developed in a different manner, it is manifest that the source being common, similarities are bound to occur. in such a case the courts should determine whether or not the similarities are on fundamental or substantial aspects of the mode of expression adopted in the copyrighted work. if the ..... co. (2006(32) ptc 157 (del.) and on appeal 2009(40) ptc 519 (del.) (db), mattel, inc. and ors. vs jayant agarwalla and ors. (2008(38) ptc 416 (del.), kiran shoes manufacturers vs registrar of copyrights and anr. (2012(50) ptc 14 (del.)(db), devendra somabhai naik vs accurate transheat pvt. ltd ..... party is able to bring his case within the framework of section 2(c) of the copyright act, 1957 while claiming a copyright, then the suit for infringement of copyright is maintainable ? . the delhi high court distinguished this case from the case of microfibres inc. (supra) in the following words: ??28. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 2015 (HC)

Rashidabai Allarakha Adult, Indian Inhabitant and Others Vs. Mehrunnis ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-30-2015

..... . 7. sometime in the year 2010, the claimants filed petition under section 9 of the arbitration act in this court inter alia praying for an appointment of court receiver. on 24th january, 2011 this court passed an order in the said petition directing the parties to maintain status-quo in relation to the ..... arbitration, the arbitral proceedings commences and it would not apply to the counter claim. in my view the aforesaid two judgments of the supreme court squarely applies to the facts of this case. the claims in my view were not barred by law of limitation and the learned arbitrator was ..... properties which were described in ex.a to the said petition. on 18th june, 2012 with the consent of the parties this court referred all the disputes between the parties to the arbitration and continued the ad-interim order passed on 24th january, 2011 until passing of the ..... partnership deed recorded an arbitration agreement. it was the case of the claimants that the respondent no.1 made false allegations vide letter dated 14th july, 2008 addressed to the claimants nos. 5, 7, 8 and 11 alleged misuse of position by the other partners. after receipt of the said letter, ..... parties shall bear their own costs. the original claimants and respondent no.1 have filed two separate arbitration petitions under section 34 of the arbitration act challenging different portions of the said arbitral award dated 30th september, 2014. 13. mr.balsara, learned counsel appearing for the original claimants invited my .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 2015 (HC)

Pidilite Industries Limited and Another Vs. Vilas Nemichand Jain and A ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-09-2015

..... think, in saying that there is insufficient evidence of sufficient widespread user, at least for what the hardcastle and waud period, as would lead a court to ineluctably conclude that the defendants products are or have been mistaken for those of the plaintiffs. of this level of deception or confusion, ..... it from the products or goods of other enterprises. how is this usually to be done? should the production of invoices be considered enough? that court held in that particular case that other factors were equally important: market share, geographical distribution, longevity of user, the proportion of the relevant class ..... difference whether the mark in question is a mark of common language, a laudatory term, a descriptive word or a geographical name. what the court of justice of the european community held was that in determining whether a mark had acquired a sufficiently distinctive character following its use, an ..... the plaintiff s products. in this context, i believe dr. saraf s reliance on the decision of a learned single judge of the delhi high court in rich products corporation and anr. v indo nippon food ltd., (2010 (42) ptc 660 (del.)is completely appropriate. paragraph 39 of that decision ..... se indicate the achievement of the level of distinctiveness that would be required. even under section 34 of the trade marks act, 1999, the prior user (from 2001 to 2008) must be shown to be continuous. the hardcastle and waud invoices produced, even on the basis they are genuine, do .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 25 2015 (HC)

Lalankumar Singh and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

Decided on : Jun-25-2015

..... will have to say about their or other's liability. in view of the aforesaid provisions and the wording of section 17 (4) of the act, this court holds that opportunity needs to be given to the prosecution to discharge such initial burden. if that is not done, in no case the prosecution ..... manufactured in the unit and also other information as needs to be provided under the act. in the letter dated 12-9-2008, the manufacturer contended that copy of report supplied by the drugs inspector was not signed by the director of central laboratory and ..... quite different which is apparent from the fact that firstly the controversy of the complaint not having any necessary averments was not present before the high court in the reported decision. secondly, in that case, there was only a bald statement that the respondents were directors of the manufacturers. in the ..... batch, the batch from which sample was collected. the dealer informed that all the bottles were already distributed by it. 6. on 21-8-2008 the drugs inspector sent letter to the manufacturing unit of accused no.4 from himachal pradesh and requested to supply information regarding quantity of aforesaid drug ..... in the drug. 5. copies of the report of the central laboratory were supplied to the main dealer, the manufacturer and retailer. on 16-10-2008 the drugs inspector visited the depot of accused no.3 dealer. the dealer informed that it had purchased 13000 200 ml of bottle of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //