Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-16-2016
..... the merits of an arbitral award are to be looked into under certain specified circumstances. 24. in dda v. r.s. sharma and co., (2008) 13 scc 80, the court summarised the law thus: 21. from the above decisions, the following principles emerge: (a) an award, which is (i) contrary to substantive provisions ..... set aside. the learned judge has maintained the award of liquidated damages in the background itself. remand and power of appellate court under section 37 of the arbitration act 58. we have to keep in mind the scope and object of the arbitration while deciding the appeal arising out of judgment ..... of the respective contract; or (iv) patently illegal; or (v) prejudicial to the rights of the parties; is open to interference by the court under section 34(2) of the act. (b) the award could be set aside if it is contrary to: (a) fundamental policy of indian law; or (b) the interest ..... in the recorded fact of number of joints, required to be carried out by landt. 34. the supreme court, reiterated the principle of section 34 of the arbitration act and the scope of court to interfere with the findings given by the arbitrator. in the present case, as recorded above, the expert ..... union of india,  14 scc 785. 53. recently, in associate builders (supra), the apex court has elaborated those principles in following words: 15. this section in conjunction with section 5 makes it clear that an arbitration award that is governed by part i of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 can be set .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-22-2016
..... its joinder as a party defendant in the suit. that prrayer was rejected as not pressed. therefore, the chamber summons for the other reliefs, namely, leave of the court to regularise the act of taking possession of the land, which is custodia legis, does not survive. those reliefs cannot be granted once the chamber summons as a whole is dismissed as not ..... in the state. there is thus clear delay in filing the writ petition and the writ petition is therefore liable to be rejected. (see swaika properties vs. state of rajasthan ((2008) 4 scc 695)) 89. it is submitted that the conduct of the petitioners is not clean and un-blemishable. the petitioners are attempting to approbate and reprobate a clear designed ..... (see pg. 223- 226/wp part ii) (ii) panchanama and possession receipt dated 28th march, 2007 (see pgs. 226 and 225/wp part ii) (iii) tabulated statement dated 20th february, 2008 (see pg./234/wp part ii) whereas, the following documents mention the date as 9th march, 2007:- (i) notice under section 11 dated 29th march, 2007 (see pg. 227-228 ..... ram singh vs. state of u. p. and ors. civil misc. writ petition no. 37964 of 2009 order dated 27th july, 2015 (high court of allahabad). (x) swaika properties (p) ltd. and anr. vs. state of rajasthan and ors. (2008) 4 scc 695. (xi) the state of bombay vs. morarji cooverji (1958) vol. lxi b. c. r. 318. (xii) m. p. mittal .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : May-06-2016
..... beneficial legislation, seeks to solve. the judicial approach should be dynamic rather than static, pragmatic and not pedantic and elastic rather than rigid. this court while acting as a sentinel on the qui vive to protect fundamental rights guaranteed to the citizens of the country must try to strike a just balance between ..... , 1950 also states that everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. the supreme court, in krishna janardhan bhat vs. dattatraya g. hegde (2008)4 scc 54)put the matter thus: 44. the presumption of innocence is a human right. (see narender singh v. state ..... as already indicated, guarantees the protection of personal autonomy of an individual. in anuj garg v. hotel assn. of india [(2008) 3 scc 1] (scc p. 15, paras 34-35), this court held that personal autonomy includes both the negative right of not to be subject to interference by others and the positive right of ..... for the state of maharashtra has made detailed submissions. his first submission is based on the decision of the apex court in the case of ashoka kumar v. union of india (2008)6 scc 1). his submission is that the challenge to the constitutional validity of any legislation can be only on ..... india. he pointed out that in the decision in the case of hinsa virodhak sangh v. mirzapur moti kuresh jamat and others (2008)5 scc 33), the apex court has observed that what one eats is one's personal affair and it is a part of his right to privacy which is .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-17-2016
..... intellectual property rights. annexure "2" to the note that she submits today has a list of 12 separate litigations initiated by the plaintiffs in various courts, including this court, in which the plaintiffs have obtained favourable orders. she also points out that dr. d.y. chandrachud, j. (as he then was) while ..... anr. v ksb real estate and finance private limited; notice of motion no.4019 of 2007 in suit no.2930 of 2007; decided on 11th february 2008). if there was any dispute about the plaintiffs' mark being recognized as a well-known mark, it is, ms. kshirsagar submits, put to rest by ..... defendant is or must be deemed to be an unregistered proprietor or user at least for the purposes of section 29(4) of the trade marks act, 1999 using dissimilar goods and, therefore, liable to suffer an injunction. if, on the other hand, the defendant persists in this claim in regard ..... too does not assist the defendant because he would then be liable to suffer injunction under sections 29(1), 29(2) and 29(3) of the act. thus, viewed from either perspective, this one submission alone is sufficient to warrant the grant of an injunction. 22. the other defences are trivial. i ..... disposal of the suit, the defendant by himself, his servants, agents, assignees, distributors and dealers be restrained by an order and injunction of this hon'ble court from manufacturing, selling, exhibiting for sale, marketing his goods/ products/ services bearing the impugned mark "ksb" and/or any other mark similar to the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai Goa
Decided on : Mar-22-2016
..... . moji ram, air 1978 sc 484; (ii) pandit ishwardas vs. state of madhya pradesh and others, (1979) 4 scc 163 and (iii) haryana waqf board vs. shanti sarup and others, (2008) 8 scc 671. 13. on the contrary, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the prayer for amendment of the plaint and production of additional document ..... , rule 17 of c.p.c would not apply to this case as the suit was instituted prior to coming into force the amendment act, 2002. however, it is necessary to mention at this stage that the appellate court has not relied upon the said provisions, while passing the impugned order. that apart, the fact that the said proviso would not be ..... the petitioners have already examined mr. shyamlal r. vishvakarma (pw-4), whose evidence has been disbelieved by the trial court. the learned counsel has also placed reliance on the decision of the hon'ble apex court in the case of chander kanta bansal, (2008) 5 scc 117, in order to submit that an application for amendment made after 18 years was held to ..... be rightly rejected. the hon'ble supreme court has referred to its earlier decision in the case of union of india .....Tag this Judgment!