Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G.S.KULKARNI, ADVAIT M.SETHNA
Royal Realtors Landmarks Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Shah Housecon Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
INDEX
| SR. NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGE NOS. |
| I. | Preface. | 3 |
| II. | Submissions of The Applicants. | 14 |
| III. | Submissions of Respondent No.1. | 26 |
| IV. | Submissions of Respondent Nos. 2 and 5. | 35 |
| V . | Submissions of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. | 40 |
| VI. | Rejoinder Submissions of The Applicants. | 45 |
| VII. | Analysis. | 54 |
| VIII. | Order | 88 |
I. Preface
1. These proceedings have a chequered background running into several volumes of documents, pleadings presented by the parties who have advanced detailed submissions and relied on several judgments. However, for the present purposes we are concerned with and would confine ourselves to the Interim Application (L) No. 26702 of 2024 dated 27 August 2024 filed by the appellant/applicant (“Applicant”). The basic issue which we are called upon to adjudicate revolves around the compromise manifesting in the consent terms dated 1 November 2023 (“Consent Terms”) executed between the applicants and respondent nos.1, 2, 5 to 7. We are confronted with a question whether such consent terms can be decreed in terms of an order passed by the Court under the provision of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“CPC”). As we delve into the nuances of varied contentions, submi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
