abhinavdread/msme-legal-dispute-classification-dataset huggingface dataset:
V.K. Valves Private Limited, C106, Focal Point Extension, Jalandhar, through its Director. .....Respondent/Complainant Revision Petition under Section 47 (1)(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 06.12.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jalandhar in C.C. No.386 of 2022. Quorum: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Present: For the petitioners : Sh. Tushar Arora, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. Arshit Goel, Advocate 1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No 3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No 2 Revision Petition No.52 of 2023 JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT: The petitioners/opposite parties i.e. Royal Sundaram GIC Limited & another, through their authorized representative have filed the present Revision Petition under Section 47(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the 'Act') for setting aside the order dated 06.12.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jalandhar (in short the 'District Commission'), whereby the petitioners/OPs Company were proceeded exparte. 2. There was delay of 95 days in filing of Revision Petition. M.A. No.838 of 2023 was filed for condonation of delay alongwith supported by an affidavit. Said delay was condoned vide order dated 21.07.2023 but subject to costs of Rs.10,000/. Accordingly the said M.A. was disposed off. The appellants had paid the amount of cost of Rs.5000/ to the respondent/complainant. M.A. No.1256 of 2023 3. This M.A. has been filed for extension of time to deposit the remaining amount of cost of Rs.5000/ and has also attached the Demand Draft bearing No.242653 dated 11.09.2023 in favour of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab. 4. The respondent/complainant had filed reply to the said application and had prayed for dismissal of Revision Petition with cost. 3 Revision Petition No.52 of 2023 5. Heard the arguments raised by learned counsel for both the parties. 6. In the interest of justice and the reasons as recorded in the application, the Registry is directed to deposit the amount of Rs.5000/ in Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission. Accordingly, the M.A. is allowed and the delay of 95 days in filing the revision petition is condoned. Main case 7. Briefly, the facts of the case which are necessary for disposal of the present Revision Petition are that the respondent/complainant filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Commission praying for directions to the OPs to settle the insurance claim and further to pay Rs.3,00,000/ on account of causing mental torture, harassment, physical discomfort and agony and financial loss and also 'deficiency of service' and 'unfair trade practice' on the part of OPs. The complainant had also prayed for Rs.33,000/ as litigation expenses. 8. Notice was issued to the OPs for 06.12.2022 vide order dated 28.10.2022. The case came up for hearing on 06.12.2022. The following order was passed which is reproduced as under : "06.12.2022 Present : Sh. Puneet Sareen, Adv. counsel for Complainant. None for counsel for OPs No
registered office at E540, Greater KailashII, New Delhi (hereinafter to be referred as plaintiff). The suit is instituted through Sh. Raman Sood, AR. 3. The claim is filed against NBCC (India) Limited, a Government of India enterprise having its head office at NBCC Place, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi (hereinafter to be referred as the defendant). 4. Plaintiff claims that it is engaged in business of manufacturing, dealing and supplying gymnasium equipments (more particularly outdoor fitness equipment known as 'open gym'), sports goods, fitness equipments, cardio vascular, isomatic fitness equipments etc., and asserts that it is well known in above business. 5. Vide letter of award No. NBCC/ED/RE/LOA/2019 2850 dated 07.10.2019, an award by defendant was placed upon the plaintiff for supplying, installation and commissioning of outdoor fitness equipments at NBCC Green View, Sector 37D, Gurugram, Haryana, for a total consideration of Rs. 3,72,400/. 6. Plaintiff received another letter of award No. NBCC/ED/RE/LOA/2019/2851 dated 07.10.2019 for supplying, installation and commissioning of outdoor fitness equipments at NBCC Heights, Sector 89, Gurugram, Haryana for contract value of Rs. 3,16,800/. 7. Both the letters of award were issued by Real Estate and Marketing and Development Division, NBCC Place, Bhishma Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi and were signed by the then Executive Director (Engineering), Real Estate Division. Digitally signed by NIRJA NIRJA BHATIA BHATIA Date: 2025.03.26 16:42:37 +0530 Grand Slam Fitness Vs. NBCC (India) Ltd. Page 2 of 12 8. The plaintiff in accordance with the work, awarded and assigned, completed the same on 05.11.2019. Tax invoices No. 843 and 844, both dated 15.11.2019 for amount of Rs. 3,16,800/ and 3,72,400/ were raised. 9. Plaintiff alleges that despite completing the work, raising the invoices and follow up made regularly for payments, defendant has not released the payments. Defendant is withholding even the security deposit made by the plaintiff which have not been refunded. 10. Plaintiff alleges that the dues became outstanding immediately upon completion of one month of issuance of the invoice i.e. on or before 15.12.2019. However, defendant has not cared to clear the payment in stipulated time and thus, the plaintiff is claiming its entitlemen
SECURITY PRINTING AND MINTING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Kabeer Paul Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Aditya Khandekar Advocate for respondent No.2. Shri Abhishek Gulatee Advocate for respondents No.1, 3 and 4. ORDER This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed assailing the order dated 31/07/2025 (AnnexureP/1), whereby respondents have declared the petitioner disqualified in technical bid. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is a registered Startup and MSME and is exempted from past experience requirements under prevailing Policies i.e. Public Procurement Policy for MSMEs, 2012. Petitioner is engaged in the business of cardboard manufacturing and is entitled to get protection flowing from Part III of the Constitution of India being its fundamental right. The Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited (SPMCIL), a wholly owned Schedule A Mini Ratna CategoryI Company of Government of India, was incorporated on 13th January 2006, which falls within the definition of State under Article 12 of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 04112025 17:20:32 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHCJBP:55198 2 WP324432025 the Constitution of India. The management, control, maintenance and operations of erstwhile 9 production units under the Currency and Coinage Division, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, was transferred to SPMCIL with effect from 10th February, 2006. SPMCIL is engaged in manufacture/ production of Currency and Bank Notes, Security Paper, NonJudicial Stamp Papers, Postal Stamps and Stationery, Travel documents i.e., Passport, Visa, Security certificates, Cheques, Bonds, Warrant, Special Certificates with security features, Security Inks, normal circulation and commemorative coins, Medallions, Refining of Gold and Silver and Assay of Precious Metals. The respondent, Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited (SPMCIL) issued a tender bearing No.GEM/2024/B/5314830 on the Government E Market Place, dated 20th September 2024, for the work titled as "Procurement of Cardboard sheet ". Total quantity required by the respondent was 1.44 L. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondents themselves have submitted a report that bidder firm is an MSME, therefore firm is exempted from past experience. But firm has provided past sales and purchase invoices for various products. Petitioner was informed by an Email dated 02/01/2025 asking it to submit experience documents but they were not properly considered by the Authorities and thereafter on 27th March, 2025, again an Email was received stating that they have not received any re
Ozone Projects Private Limited, rep by its Managing Director, having office at New No.63, G.N.Chetty Road, T.Nagar, Chennai600 017. .. Defendant This Civil Suit is preferred under Order IV Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Order VII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking for a decree and judgment (a) for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to purchase materials as per purchase order No.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/1112/049 dated 8.2.2012 and as amended by purchase order No.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/11 12/049 dated 27.4.2012 or alternatively to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,00,000/ as liquidated damages for breach of contract under purchase order No.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/1112/049 dated 8.2.2012 and as amended by purchase order No.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/1112/049 dated 27.4.2012, (b)for permanent injunction restraining the defendant their men, agent or servant from purchasing the materials covered under purchase order http://www.judis.nic.inNo.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/1112/049 dated 8.2.2012 and as amended by purchase 2 order No.OZ/MZ/PO1/PO/1112/049 dated 27.4.2012 from any third person, (c)for costs of the suit and (d)for such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case and render justice. For Plaintiff : Mr.Raja Kalifulla, SC for Mr.N.Ishtiaq Ahmed For Defendant : Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam for M/s.BFS Legal JUDGMENT There is a sole plaintiff and a sole defendant in the instant suit. 2 Factual matrix of the suit can be set out in a nutshell as facts are simple and not voluminous. In very simple terms, this suit pertains to supply of Unplasticized Polyvinyl Chloride (UPVC) windows and doors by plaintiff to defendant. The UPVC windows and doors shall hereinafter be referred to as 'suit products' for the sake of convenience and clarity. 3 Defendant is in the industry of property development and real estate. Defendant embarked upon a project of developing a mixed use Township in the name and style 'The Metrozone' in Chennai, which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'suit project' for the sake of brevity. The suit project involved construction of 29 towers consisting of residential apartments. At the time of inception of the suit, 24 towers were approved and five towers were in the proposal stage. Defendant issued a notice inviting tenders dated 04.01.2012 for supply of suit products for three basements and http://www.judis.nic.in 3 29 residential towers. It is submitted that each tower consists of ground + 16 appurtenant structures. It is not in dispute that plaintiff responded to the aforesaid notice inviting tenders, plaintiff was initially given the work order for suit products for three towers and subsequently,
Delhi High Court Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd vs Delhi Development Authority on 1 September, 2025 $~J * Judgment reserved on: 30.05.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 01.09.2025 + O.M.P. (COMM) 189/2018 & I.A. 47338/2024 GL LITMUS EVENTS PVT. LTD. ..........Petitioner Through: Mr. P.V. Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vijay M. Phadke, Ms. Manali Singhal, Mr. Santosh Sachin, Mr. Deepak Singh Rawat, Advs. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .........Respondent Through: Mr. Ramesh Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Shobhana Takiar, SC with Ms. Chand Chopra, Ms. Neha Bhupathiraju, Ms. Mage Nanya, Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advs. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH JUDGMENT 1. The present petition is filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("1996 Act") assailing the Arbitral Award Digitally Signed O.M.P. (COMM) 189/2018 Page 1 of 32 By:MAYANK Signing Date:01.09.2025 17:17:04 dated 27.11.2017 passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator wherein all the 16 claims raised by the petitioner were rejected. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2. M/s GL Event Services and M/s Meroform (India) Pvt. Ltd. formed a consortium and signed a Consortium Agreement dated 19.05.2009 to bid for a tender related to the Commonwealth Games 2010, which were scheduled to be held in Delhi in October, 2010.The consortium formed a Joint Venture Company namely GL Litmus Events Pvt. Ltd. i.e. the petitioner, in pursuance of Clause 1 of Annexure A of the Consortium Agreement. 3. The responsibility of organizing the Commonwealth Games Projects for Design Built Maintenance and Rental Contract for Temporary Accommodation using Tensile Fabric at Commonwealth Games Village was assigned to the respondent. Pursuant to this, the respondents invited applications for shortlisting suitable organization/companies for providing Games Overlays/ temporary fitments on Turnkey basis and for executing works under Commonwealth Games Projects, through a Global Tender, published in various newspapers. 4. The petitioner submitted its bid in the said tender and subsequently, the respondent accepted the bid vide its Letter of Acceptance dated 02.03.2010 to the petitioner. As per the said Letter of Acceptance, the date of the commencement of the Execution of work under the aforesaid Project was fixed as 02.03.2010 and the Work was to be completed in three Phases. As per the condition stipulated in the Letter of Acceptance, the petitioner was submitted two Performance Bank Digitally Signed O.M.P. (COMM) 189/2018 Page 2 of 32 By:MAYANK Signing Date:01.09.2025 17:17:04 Guarantees equal to 5% of the tendered amount, which amounted to a sum of Rs. 2,06,89,513/.
1. M/S RAJASTHAN LAND HOLDINGS LIMITED A company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 Through its Director Address: R/o 1st Floor, LIC Jeevan Nidhi Building, Ambedkar Circle, Bhawani Singh Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302021 ...Respondent No.1 2. ANURADHA GUPTA Erstwhile Resolution Professional of M/s Rajasthan Land Holdings Limited Address: E194, Ambabari, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan302039 ...Respondent No.2 3. IL&FS TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS LIMITED A company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 Through its Director Address: The IL&FS Financial Centre, Plot C22, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 ...Respondent No.3 4. HILINE BUILDCON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED A company incorporated under Companies Act 1956 Through its Director Address: 13, Parivahan Marg, Civil, Lines, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001 ...Respondent No.4 5. BHANDARI & CO. Through its Authorised Representative Address: P7, Tilak Marg, CScheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan302001 ...Respondent No.5 Present: For Appellant : Mr. Kshitij Mittal, Mr. Abhyuday Singh, Advocates. For Respondent : Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Ms. Niyati Kohli, Advocates for R1. Mr. Raunak Dhillon, Ms. Isha Malik, Mr. Nihaad Dewan, Mr. Anchit Jasuja, Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Advocates for R 3 (ITNL). WITH Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 785 of 2023 [Arising out of the Impugned Order dated 20.04.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in IA No.100/JPR/2020 & CP No. (IB) 44/9/JPR/2019] In the matter of: ANURADHA GUPTA, ERSTWHILE RP OF M/s. Rajasthan Land Holdings Limited, R/0 E194, Amba Bari, Jaipur302039, Rajasthan ...Appellant Versus 1. M/S. RAJPUTANA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., R/o 13, Parivahan Marg, Civil Lines, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001. ...Respondent No.1 2. M/S. HI LINE BUILDCON (INDIA) PVT. LTD., R/o 13, Parivahan Marg, Civil Lines, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302001. ...Respondent No.2 3. M/s S. BHANDARI & CO., R/o P7, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur302005 ...Respondent No.3 4. IL&FS TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS LIMITED, R/o THE IL&FS Financial Centre, Plot C22, G Block, Bandra, Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai400051 ...Respondent No.4 Present: Page 2 of 23 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 853 & 785 of 2023 For Appellant : Mr. Yash Tandon, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Ms. Niyati Kohli, Advocates. Mr. Raunak Dhillon, Ms. Isha Malik, Mr. Nihaad Dewan, Mr. Anchit Jasuja, Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Advocates for R 4 (ITNL). JUDGMENT (Hybrid Mode) Per: Barun Mitra, Member (Technical) The present set of two appeals filed under Section 61 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 ('IBC' in short) by the Appellants arises out of a common Order dated 20.04.2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'Impugned Order') passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur Bench) in IA No. 100/JPR/2020 in CP No. (IB) 44/9/JPR/2019. By the impugned order, the Adjudicating Authority has t
Gujarat High Court M/S Sureshchandra Dhulabhai Patel vs Secretary, Industries And Mines ... on 30 November, 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/13056/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/11/2023 undefined R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13056 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 389 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1139 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1191 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6823 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9167 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9151 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13154 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13271 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13156 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17393 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13669 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13173 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15535 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13604 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13601 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13550 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13486 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13553 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13552 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15778 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15249 of 2021 Page 1 of 113 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 01 20:43:13 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/13056/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 30/11/2023 undefined With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15250 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14221 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14376 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14379 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14954 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14610 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14623 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15812 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14604 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14607 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17445 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15810 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17426 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17584 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14906 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15875 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17444 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3013 of 2022 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15776 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15774 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16009 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIV
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Jai Balaji Industries Ltd vs Raipur on 7 July, 2021 1 Excise Appeal No.50154 of 2019 (SM) CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPLELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI COURT NO. II Excise Appeal No.50154 of 2019 (SM) [Arising out of OrderinAppeal No.BHOEXCUS002APP2761819 dated 30.07.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Raipur] M/s.Jai Balaji Industries Limited (UnitV) Appellant Borai Industrial Growth Centre, VillageRasamada, Distt.Durg (C.G.), VERSUS Commissioner of Central Goods & Respondent Service Tax and Central Excise, GST Bhawan,Tikrapara, Raipur. APPEARANCE: Ms.Surabhi Sinha, Advocate for the appellant Ms. Tamnna Alam, Authorised Representative for the respondent. FINAL ORDER NO.51641/2021 DATE OF HEARING:11.06.2021 DATE OF DECISION:07/07/2021 ANIL CHOUDHARY: The appellant, Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. is engaged in the manufacture of Sponge Iron and M.S. Billets, in two Divisions, under common registration. Both the products Sponge Iron and M.S. Billets are dutiable. For sponge iron, they have three rotary kiln of 100 TPD each, whereas for manufacturing of M.S. Billets, they have four Induction furnace of 8 Ton capacity each. Raw materials for Sponge Iron are Iron Ore Lumps, Iron Ore Pellets, Coal and dolomite. Raw materials for M.S. billets are Pig iron, M.S. scrap, and sponge iron (including Inhouse production). The appellant maintains regular books of accounts and the statutory records. 2 Excise Appeal No.50154 of 2019 (SM) 2. There was an inspection in the factory premises on 9.6.2016. On being asked, Mr. Rajiv Ghore, Dy. Manager (Accounts), who was present, declared the stock of finished goods and raw materials as held by them on 9.6.2016. The officers with the help of one surveyor, viz. Dinesh Patel employed with South Eastern Cold Fields Ltd., conducted physical verification of the stock, which was worked out as follows: Name of Declared Stock (MT) Stock found Shortage Item during physical verification M.S. Billets 22.28 9.91 12.370 Pig Iron 1160.77 385.458 775.312 Coal Fines 8157.65 7851.207 306.443 Iron Ore 23251.16 22700.715 550.445 Iron Ore 579.46 553.484 25.976 Pellets 3. The difference in the declared stock and physical stock (in verification) was found to be within tolerance limit as regards coal fines, iron ore & iron ore pellets. However, as regards shortage in M.S. Billets and pig iron, the officers considered the same to be substantial and beyond the tolerance limit and accordingly worked out the differential duty on such shortage calculated as follows: Name of Declared Stock Shortage/Excess Rate No. & Date of Value Duty @ item stock found Quantity. per invoice from 12/50% (MT) during M.T. which rate physical ascertained verification. M.S.Billets 22.28 9.91 12.370 21400 80790 2,64,718 33,090 Dt.08.06.16 Pig Iron 1160.77 385.458 775.312 17000 4454 1,31,80,304 16,47,538 dt.22.05.16 Total 16,80,628 4. Statement of Shri Rajiv Ghore, Dy. Manager (Accounts) was recorded during the panchnama proceedings, who inter alia, stated that due to accident in the factory on 27.05.2016, the production process was stopped and rem