Partnership Law

Supreme Court Clarifies “Optional” Arbitration Clauses in Partnership Deeds: Tarun Dhameja vs. Sunil Dhameja (2024)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11(6), Disputes in Partnership, Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses, Partnership Deed, Partnership Law

Supreme Court Clarifies “Optional” Arbitration Clauses in Partnership Deeds: Tarun Dhameja vs. Sunil Dhameja (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of arbitration clauses in partnership deeds, specifically the meaning of “optional” arbitration. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Tarun Dhameja vs. Sunil Dhameja & Anr. Judgment Date: 06 December 2024 Date of the Judgment: 06 December 2024 […]

Supreme Court Clarifies “Optional” Arbitration Clauses in Partnership Deeds: Tarun Dhameja vs. Sunil Dhameja (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of consumer complaint by a partner against partnership firm: Annapurna B. Uppin & Ors. vs. Malsiddappa & Anr. (2024) INSC 276 (05 April 2024)

/ Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Deficiency in Service, Liability of Partners, Partnership Act, 1932, Partnership Law

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of consumer complaint by a partner against partnership firm: Annapurna B. Uppin & Ors. vs. Malsiddappa & Anr. (2024) INSC 276 (05 April 2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a partner of a partnership firm can file a consumer complaint against the firm for deficiency in service. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name:

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of consumer complaint by a partner against partnership firm: Annapurna B. Uppin & Ors. vs. Malsiddappa & Anr. (2024) INSC 276 (05 April 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Injunction for Booth Possession: Madan Mohan Singh vs. Ved Prakash Arya (2021)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Contract Law, Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants, Judges, Mandatory Injunction, Partnership Deed, Property Law, Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, R. Subhash Reddy, Tenancy Disputes

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Injunction for Booth Possession: Madan Mohan Singh vs. Ved Prakash Arya (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a mandatory injunction can be issued to restore possession of a property to the original allottee when the occupant claims to be a tenant, but no tenancy is proven and the Chief Administrator has declared the

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Injunction for Booth Possession: Madan Mohan Singh vs. Ved Prakash Arya (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between retirement and dissolution of a partnership firm: Guru Nanak Industries vs. Amar Singh (2020)

/ Dissolution of Partnership, Judges, Krishna Murari, N.V. Ramana, Partnership Act, 1932, Partnership Act, 1932 with Section 37, Partnership Act, 1932 with Section 48, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between retirement and dissolution of a partnership firm: Guru Nanak Industries vs. Amar Singh (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification on the distinction between retirement of a partner and dissolution of a partnership firm. CASE TYPE: Partnership Law Case Name: Guru Nanak Industries, Faridabad and Another vs. Amar Singh (Dead) through LRS

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between retirement and dissolution of a partnership firm: Guru Nanak Industries vs. Amar Singh (2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top