Case Laws-Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Case Laws Portal

Commercial Courts Act, 2015 Case Laws Portal

OnePage

My Folder

Case Laws

Bare Acts

Calculators

Account

Instructions:

> Filters work on “AND” basis (e.g. if select an item from Subject and Click on apply, all other filters will show terms related of applied subject only).You can apply multiple filters simultaneously to get precise results.

> A Section contains case laws of all sub-sections (e.g. Filtering Section 02, will show case laws mapped with all sub-sections of Section 2). To search sub-section specific case laws, filter only that sub-section.

> “Sub-subjects” filter options can directly be used without using first/with “Main Subject”.

> Having lots of judgment in a specific subject/Section, if you want to filter only Important/Landmark judgment under that specific subject/Section, select “Filter Only Landmark/Imp Cases” option.

> To start afresh searching, “Reset” first using Reset Button.

> For Keywords/Phrases search, separate button is available on Right side. similarly, for Case Name, Appeal No., Order/Judgment Date.
> For more, check Search Guide here (pdf). For YouTube Videos, Click here.

 

  • Subjects

  • Sub-Subjects

  • Sections/Sub-sections..

  • Court/Tribunal/Bench

  • Filter Important/landmark Cases

  • Case Name

  • Case/Appeal No.

  • Date

  • Coram [Number]

  • Month

  • Year

  • Result per page

  • Sort Results

Can professional fees recovery dispute between a Lawyer/Advocate and his client be held to be a ‘commercial dispute’ under Section 2(1)(c)(xviii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015? – Atmastco Ltd. Vs. Mandeep Kalra – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 567 HC
Case Name:
Atmastco Ltd. v. Mandeep Kalra
Order Date:
02/07/2024
Appeal No.:
CRP-53/2024-HC
Subjects:
CCA-Commercial Dispute
;
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [CCA]
Section:
CCA-02 (1)
;
CCA-02 (1) (c)
;
CCA-02 (1) (c) (xviii)
Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that: (i) The dispute between a lawyer and his client where the former is seeking recovery of professional fees, cannot be held to be a ‘commercial dispute’. Lawyers are not ‘tradesmen’ or ‘businessmen’. Lawyers and advocates are supposed to be professional legal experts and major stakeholders in the “adversarial justice delivery system” who render legal advice & services to their clients but have larger duties as officers of the Court whenever they are engaged for providing legal representation to their clients in the Courts of law. (ii) The agreement between an advocate and his/her client envisaging provisions of legal advice and services cannot be in the nature of a ‘commercial dispute’ since such agreement cannot even be specifically enforced. The Legal Profession is sui generis i.e. unique in nature and cannot be compared with any other profession.

Ekanek Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aditya Mertia – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 504 HC
Case Name:
Ekanek Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. Aditya Mertia
Order Date:
28/05/2024
Appeal No.:
CMA-4805/2024-HC
CRP-31/2024-HC
Subjects:
CCA-Commercial Dispute
;
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [CCA]
;
Other Laws- Specific Relief Act
Section:
CCA-02 (1)
;
CCA-02 (1) (c)
;
CCA-02 (1) (c) (xviii)

Casa 2 Stays Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Comfia Ecom Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 439 HC
Case Name:
Casa 2 Stays Pvt. Ltd. v. Comfia Ecom Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
13/05/2024
Appeal No.:
CAV-445/2023-HC
RFA(COMM)-187/2023-HC
Subjects:
Section:

Sanjay Goel Vs. BKR Capital Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 386 HC
Case Name:
Sanjay Goel v. BKR Capital Pvt. Ltd.
Order Date:
07/05/2024
Appeal No.:
CMA-26930/2024-HC
TRP(C)-76/2024-HC
Subjects:
Section:

G4S Secure Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Ltd. – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 383 HC
Case Name:
G4S Secure Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Matrix Cellular (International) Services Ltd.
Order Date:
07/05/2024
Appeal No.:
ArbP-427/2024-HC
Subjects:
CH-03 Arbitrators/ Arbitral Tribunal Composition/Appointment
Section:
11 (6)
;
ACA-11

The Chief Engineer, Roads & Bridges Department, Government of Sikkim Vs. KMC Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. – Sikkim High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 395 HC
Case Name:
The Chief Engineer Roads & Bridges Department Government of Sikkim v. KMC Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd.
Order Date:
06/05/2024
Appeal No.:
WP(C)-06/2024-HC
Subjects:
Other Laws- CPC
Section:

Legend Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs. P Srinivas Reddy – Telangana High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 376 HC
Case Name:
Legend Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. P Srinivas Reddy
Order Date:
30/04/2024
Appeal No.:
CRP-1350/2024-HC
CRP-1357/2024-HC
CRP-1365/2024-HC
Subjects:
Conduct Arbitration-Interim Reliefs/Measures [Sec.9]
;
Writ Petition Article 227
Section:
ACA-09

The provisions of the Limitation Act have to be construed differently, such as Section 3 has to be construed in a strict sense whereas Section 5 has to be construed liberally – Pathapati Subba Reddy (Died) By L.Rs. and Ors. Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (LA) – Supreme Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 107 SC
Case Name:
Pathapati Subba Reddy (Died) By L.Rs. and Ors. v. The Special Deputy Collector (LA)
Order Date:
08/04/2024
Appeal No.:
SLP(C)-31248/2018-SC
Subjects:
Limitation Act 1963 Provisions
Section:
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that: (i) Law of limitation is based upon public policy that there should be an end to litigation by forfeiting the right to remedy rather than the right itself; (ii) A right or the remedy that has not been exercised or availed of for a long time must come to an end or cease to exist after a fixed period of time; (iii) The provisions of the Limitation Act have to be construed differently, such as Section 3 has to be construed in a strict sense whereas Section 5 has to be construed liberally; (iv) In order to advance substantial justice, though liberal approach, justice-oriented approach or cause of substantial justice may be kept in mind but the same cannot be used to defeat the substantial law of limitation contained in Section 3 of the Limitation Act; (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence; (vi) Merely some persons obtained relief in similar matter, it does not mean that others are also entitled to the same benefit if the court is not satisfied with the cause shown for the delay in filing the appeal; (vii) Merits of the case are not required to be considered in condoning the delay; and (viii) Delay condonation application has to be decided on the parameters laid down for condoning the delay and condoning the delay for the reason that the conditions have been imposed, tantamounts to disregarding the statutory provision.

Atanu Bhattacharjee and Anr. Vs. Corporation Bank – Delhi High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 298 HC
Case Name:
Atanu Bhattacharjee and Anr. v. Corporation Bank
Order Date:
04/04/2024
Appeal No.:
CMA-129/2020-HC
RFA-04/2020-HC
Subjects:
CPC-151
;
CPC-96
;
Other Laws- CPC
Section:
CCA-13
;
CCA-13 (1A)

Shivalik Silica and others Vs. Anjali Singhal – Punjab & Haryana High Court

Case Details:
Case Citation:
(2024) ibclaw.in 338 HC
Case Name:
Shivalik Silica and Ors. v. Anjali Singhal
Order Date:
04/04/2024
Appeal No.:
CR-1673/2024(O&M)-HC
Subjects:
CCA-Commercial Dispute
;
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [CCA]
;
Writ Petition Article 227
Section:
1 2 3 23

For any suggestion/discrepancy, please WhatsApp to +91 9577994433.
Please submit here your quote about IBC Laws services, we publish it on our website in “What Our Visitors say” Section.

Read our disclaimer, copyright, policies, terms of services, etc.

Copyright © IBC Laws

 

Scroll to Top