High Court Applies Test of Preponderance of Probability to determine Subletting in Commercial Tenancy

High Court Applies Test of Preponderance of Probability to determine Subletting in Commercial Tenancy

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“HC”) was hearing a Revision Application challenging the decree passed by the Hon’ble District Judge-II, Panvel Raigad dismissing Regular Civil Appeal No. 189 of 2019 and upholding the decree passed

Plaintiff Must Establish a Reasonable Cause of Action, Not Merely A Pseudo Cause of Action

Plaintiff Must Establish a Reasonable Cause of Action, Not Merely A Pseudo Cause of Action

The Hon’ble Telangana High Court (“HC”) while dismissing an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (“CPC”) emphasized that a Plaintiff must demonstrate a legitimate right to sue, rather

An Application filed under Section 65 of the Code is maintainable after the Application under Section 7,9 or 10 is filed, and not after the admission: Hon’ble NCLAT.

An Application filed under Section 65 of the Code is maintainable after the Applications under Section 7,9 or 10 are filed, and not necessarily only after admission: Hon’ble NCLAT, New Delhi

Introduction: The Hon’ble NCLAT in a significant ruling, recently addressed a crucial issue in insolvency jurisprudence vide its Order dated 05.08.2024 in the matter of Devashree Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. vs Aravali Cylinders Pvt.

Our Partner Shrishail Kittad quoted in moneycontrol.com

In a recent article published by moneycontrol.com titled “RBI’s new rules for P2P platforms: A net positive for lenders, borrowers”, Our Partner Shrishail Kittad shares his expert insights. Shrishail Opined “The requirement of T +

NCLAT’s Authoritative Interpretation of Prior Approval under Section 33(5) of the I&B Code.

NCLAT’s Authoritative Interpretation of Prior Approval under Section 33(5) of the I&B Code

Introduction On May 31, 2024, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, delivered a significant judgment in the matter of Slimline Realty Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Jigar Bhatt. The ruling, encapsulated

Treatment of EPFO Dues (7A, 7Q and 14B of EPF Act) in Liquidation Exclusion under IBC Section 36(4)(a)(iii) and Non-Applicability of Section 53(1)

Treatment of EPFO Dues (7A, 7Q and 14B of EPF Act) in Liquidation: Exclusion under IBC Section 36(4)(a)(iii) and Non-Applicability of Section 53(1)

Introduction: In the case of Mr. Anuj Bajpai vs. Employee Provident Fund Organisation & Ors.[i], Liquidator submitted that Contribution under Section 7A should have been treated in accordance with Section 36(4) of the Code and,

1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 105