Kerala HC Issues Notice to Digi Yatra Foundation in PIL Seeking Strict Compliance with DPDP Act 2023 for Airport Passenger Data: High Court of Kerala
07 Mar 2026
Appointment to Higher Post on Compassionate Grounds Not a Matter of Right: J&K&L High Court
07 Mar 2026
Nearly Decade-Long Delay in Patnitop Illegal Construction PIL Appalls J&K&L High Court; Directs PDA CEO to Join Proceedings
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Employees Under CCS Pension Rules Excluded from PG Act Section 2(e) Gratuity: Delhi HC Upholds Forfeiture on Resignation
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
CJI Kant: Action Needed for More Women Judges
10 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. Natarajan, J
T.BEENA – Appellant
Versus
VYSALI PHARMACEUTICALS LTD – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
Judgment
(Dated: 12th December, 2025)
This review petition is filed by the petitioner/1st respondent in O.P.(C) No.800 of 2025, for review of the Order dated 10.06.2025 passed by this court.
2. The counsel for the petitioner has contended that the respondent herein filed O.P.(C) No.800 of 2025, challenging the order passed by the Sub Court, Ernakulam, in I.A.No.3 of 2025 in O.S. No.41 of 2025, for having granted an ad interim injunction against the respondents herein. The same was challenged by the respondent No.1 herein by filing O.P.(C) No.800 of 2025 along with respondent No.2, who is the liquidator of the respondent No.1, the company, and the same was allowed by this court and set aside the order of granting temporary injunction vide impugned order dated 10.06.2025. The petitioner is the respondent in O.P.(C) No.800 of 2025, and the plaintiff in the original suit filed this review petition, contending that there is an e
A Civil Court cannot entertain suits regarding matters under the jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal as per IBC sections 63 and 231.
A dissolved entity cannot maintain a suit as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, rendering any orders passed by a court lacking jurisdiction illegal.
The Companies Act, 2013 bars civil court jurisdiction in company disputes, mandating adjudication by the National Company Law Tribunal.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 prevails over the Companies Act, particularly in the context of stalling proceedings under section 7 of the Code. The court has the inherent power to recall/m....
The NCLT has jurisdiction to adjudicate insolvency petitions against personal guarantors even in the absence of pending CIRP against the corporate debtor, as per the provisions of the Insolvency and ....
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code's provisions override tax claims from pre-insolvency periods, barring enforcement of assessments not included in a Resolution Plan.
(1) Review of Judgment – A party is not entitled to seek a review of a judgment delivered by this Court merely for the purpose of a rehearing and a fresh decision of case.
(2) Any passing referenc....
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
Listen Article