Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
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