Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Dev Motta
Ad-Interim Ex-Parte Injunction Given To Arijit Singh For Violation Of His Personality And Publicity Rights By Use Of AI
In a recent landmark judgment, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of renowned singer Arijit Singh. Arijit Singh had approached the Hon'ble Court to seek protection of his personality and publicity rights under Section 38-B of the Copyright Act, 1957. Arijit Singh is a prominent playback singer in the Indian music industry.
Whether an importer liable to pay GST on the goods imported under the CIF Contract?
Introduction: M/s. Sanathan Textile Pvt. Ltd. (“Petitioner”) filed a Writ Petition[1] before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“Bombay High Court / Hon’ble Court”) to challenge the demand raised by Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax (“GST”) with respect to service tax levied on import of goods in a vessel from place outside India under Cost, Insurance, Freight (“CIF”) Contract.
Whether the Doctrine of Group of Companies is valid under the jurisprudence of India Arbitration Act?
Introduction While considering an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”), a three judge bench of Supreme Court doubted the correctness of the application of the doctrine of ‘Group of Companies’ by the Indian courts. Therefore, the Constitution Bench was called upon to determine the validity of the said doctrine in the jurisprudence of Indian Arbitration in the case between Cox and Kings Limited vs SAP India Private Limited & Anr.
Whether A Joint Application Can Be Made Against Three Separate Corporate Entities Involved In A Real Estate Project For Initiating CIRP?
Introduction Mist Avenue Pvt. Ltd. ("Mist Avenue"), Mist Direct Sales Pvt. Ltd. ("Mist Direct") and Anand Infoedge Pvt. Ltd. ("Anand Infoedge") (collectively "Appellants") filed three separate Appeals1 before the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi ("NCLAT") challenging the order dated October 21, 2022 ("Impugned Order") passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench ("NCLT").
Whether A Consumer Forum Bound To Refer The Dispute To Arbitration Despite Existence Of A Valid Arbitration Agreement?
Introduction Smt. M. Hemalatha Devi & Ors. ("Appellants") filed an Appeal1 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India ("Supreme Court") challenging the impugned orders dated May 19, 2022 and November 25, 2022 passed by the Telangana High Court ("High Court") which dismissed the application of the Appellants to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act"). Facts a. Smt. B.
The Clause Under The Purchase Order Shall Prevail On Conflicting Arbitration Clauses In Purchase Order And Invoices - Arbitration & Dispute Resolution - India
Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms.
Whether the marine insurance claim of the Ship Owner be rejected on the ground that the Vessel was unseaworthy during the voyage?
Introduction: Hind Offshore Pvt. Ltd. (“Appellants”) filed an Appeal[1] before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) assailing the impugned order dated May 15, 2015 passed by the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (“NCDRC”) which upheld the order passed by the NCDRC dismissing the consumer complaint filed by the Appellant.
Is the power to appoint an arbitrator that is given to the parties reinstated if the former arbitrator is unable to perform their duties?
Facts Background Decision Srei Equipment Finance Limited (the petitioner) filed an arbitration petition before the High Court of Calcutta, under section 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (the Act), seeking to replace the arbitrators that were appointed by the Court on 22 February 2022. The petitioner filed this petition as the previous arbitrators were unable to perform their duties. Facts The petitioner had initially appointed an arbitrator.
Whether a third-party funder is liable to bear awarded costs in case the Arbitral Award is passed against its fundee?
Introduction: Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Limited (“Appellant”) filed an Appeal before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi (“Hon’ble Court”) challenging the order dated March 07, 2023 (“Impugned Order”) passed by the Learned Single Judge of the Hon’ble High Court (“Ld. Single Judge”) thereby allowing the interim reliefs sought by SBS Holdings Inc.
Is it permissible for the Arbitral Tribunal to allow parties to continue or revive the proceedings once terminated?
Introduction: M/s. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority and M/s. Hyderabad Growth Corridor Limited (“Petitioners”) approached the Telangana High Court (“High Court”) by filing a Civil Revision Petition[1] to set aside the order passed by an Arbitral Tribunal in an Interim Application No. 1 of 2023 filed under Section 32 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”). Brief facts: On 18th August 2007, the Petitioners entered into a concession agreement (“Agreement”) with M/s.
Can inconsistent pleas in a plaint be a ground to reject it under the Civil Procedure Code?
Facts Decision G Nagaraj and V Rajanna (the appellants) filed an appeal(1) before the Supreme Court challenging an impugned order dated 24 April 2019. This order was passed by the Karnataka High Court(2) and confirmed an order passed by the City Civil Court, Bengaluru (the Trial Court) for rejection of a plaint under order VII rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) 1908.
Reporting fraudulent transactions: is there a limitation period?
Facts Decision Facts Mr Thomas George (the appellant), the suspended director of M/s Mathstraman Manufacturers and Traders Private Limited (the corporate debtor) filed an appeal(1) before the Chennai National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) challenging the order passed by the Kochi National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), thereby allowing the application filed under section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) by Mr K Easwara Pillai, the resolution professional (RP).
Can The Corporate Debtor Raise The Issue Of Pre-existing Dispute If Not Raised Within 10 Days Of Receipt Of Demand Notice?
Introduction: Brand Realty Services Ltd. being the Operational Creditor ("Appellants / Operational Creditor") filed an Appeal1 before the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Delhi ("NCLAT") challenging the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi ("NCLT") thereby rejecting the application filed under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC") against M/s. Sir John Bakeries India Pvt. Ltd. ("Corporate Debtor").
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Dev
Contact Dev, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack