Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Technicality cannot be attached with a notice served under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as that would defeat the objective of the statute, which provides for a speedy resolution of the disputes.”
In the present case, Clause 12 of the partnership deed indicated that the Partnership Act, 1932 and its Rules shall cover only those aspects not specifically mentioned in the deed.
The remand in the present case could only be correlated with Rule 23-A of Order XLI CPC and for its applicability, the necessary requirements were that “the decree is reversed in appeal and a re-trial is considered necessary”, thus, the Supreme Court held that the remand in the present case was not justified.
by Swarnendu Chatterjee† Anwesha Pal†† and Yashwardhan Singh†††
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 11
Supreme Court: Explaining the law on vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the bench of Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna*,
Bombay High Court: Expressing that, a firm is not a legal entity, N.J. Jamadar, J., held that a partnership firm is only
Supreme Court: In a loan default case, the Division Bench of L. Nageswara Rao* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., rejected pleas of Rahul
Kerala High Court: N.Nagaresh, J., pronounced a landmark judgment regarding right to practice of Chartered Accountants. The Bench held, “The decision of
National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT): A Division Bench of Chandra Bhan Singh (Technical Member) and Suchitra Kanuparthi (Judicial Member) dismissed an application