top of page
_edited.png)
Bombay high court appoints receiver to trace hypothecated construction equipment, declines bank account attachment in section 9 petition
Bombay High Court Appoints Receiver for Hypothecated Equipment, Rejects Bank Account Attachment Request in Section 9 Petition. Tata Capital Ltd. v. Jain Globals and Ors. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4173 HC Court: High Court of Bombay Case No.: Comm Arbitration Petition (L) No. 8727 of 2026 (with 23 connected petitions) Decided on: 28-Jul-26 Coram: Mr. Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has held that while a financier is entitled to interim protection for tracing and pre
Debarment order is an administrative action, not a contractual dispute; section 9 petition not maintainable: Delhi high court
Delhi High Court Clarifies Debarment Orders as Administrative Actions: Section 9 Petitions Deemed Unmaintainable, Highlights adrEdge. NCC Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India | O.M.P. (I) (COMM) 140/2026 | Delhi High Court | Mr. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar | Decided on July 1, 2026 Background The Delhi High Court has held that a challenge to a debarment order issued by the Airport Authority of India (AAI) against a contractor is not arbitrable, since such an order stems
bottom of page