Allahabad High Court
Allahabad High Court Dismisses PIL Against Retrospective Property Tax By Kanpur Municipal Corp.
On 12 January, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the retrospective enhancement of property tax by the Kanpur Municipal Corporation, holding that a PIL is not maintainable where the relief sought essentially pertains to the private grievances of an association's members. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held: “Filing of petitions in the nature of PIL, though essentially projecting the interest...
RERA Tribunal Order Unsustainable Where Heard by One Bench And Pronounced By Another: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has set aside a judgment of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, holding that a case heard by one bench cannot be decided by another bench if one of its members did not hear the arguments. The court said such a judgment is unsustainable in law and goes against fundamental principles of judicial procedure. A Single Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said that the bench that hears a matter must also decide it. It added that views of members who heard the case...
Interest For Delayed Possession Under RERA Can't Be Waived Through Private Settlement: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has recently held that a private settlement between a promoter and a homebuyer cannot override mandatory statutory obligations under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Dismissing an appeal filed by the Lucknow Development Authority, a single bench of Justice Prashant Kumar upheld an order directing payment of statutory interest to a buyer for delay in handing over possession of a flat.The court said the law leaves no scope for promoters to avoid...
Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge To DRT Registrar's Power To Issue Notices In SARFAESI Proceedings
The Allahabad High Court has rejected a challenge to a notice issued by the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Tribunal in a securitisation case, holding that the Registrar was empowered under the DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993. “When power to issue notice to a defendant has specifically been conferred upon the Registrar of DRT, it cannot be said that the Registrar has no power to issue notice to a defendant to show-cause as to why the S.A. should not be allowed, and also to caution the defendant...
Physical Service Of Notices Necessary After Cancellation Of GST Registration: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court on 19 January held that any adjudication notice issued after the cancellation of a GST registration must be served physically to the assessee to comply with the principles of natural justice. A Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Indrajeet Shukla was hearing a challenge against a notice issued to the petitioner three years after its GST registration was cancelled. The petitioner argued that it could not access the portal to which the notice had been...
Wrong PIN Code In E-Way Bill Alone Cannot Trigger Seizure Or Penalty Under GST Act: Allahabad High Court Reaffirms
The Allahabad High Court has once again made it clear that GST authorities cannot detain goods or impose penalties merely because of a wrong PIN Code in an e-way bill, if the addresses of the consignor and consignee are otherwise correct. A single-judge bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal held that proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act are are not justified for clerical mistakes. Relying on a binding circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and his own earlier...
GST Authorities Cannot Pass Orders Against Deceased Taxpayer, Recover From Heirs: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that while GST law allows proceedings to be pursued against a legal heir after the death of a taxpayer, authorities cannot determine tax liability in the name of a deceased person and then recover it from the heir. The court ruled that Section 93 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, permits recovery from legal representatives only after a valid determination against them, and not through orders passed against a dead assessee. A bench of Justice Shekhar B...
Allahabad High Court Has No Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, Cannot Extend Arbitrator's Mandate U/S 29A A&C Act
The Allahabad High Court has held that it lacks jurisdiction to extend the mandate of an arbitrator under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on the ground that it does not exercise ordinary original civil jurisdiction and therefore does not fall within the definition of “Court” under Section 2(1)(e)(i) of the Act. Consequently, the High Court ruled that it cannot entertain writ petitions seeking time-bound or expeditious disposal of arbitral proceedings when a specific...
HC Is Proper Forum To Enforce Domestic Award From International Commercial Arbitration Seated In India: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court, clarifying the forum for execution of arbitral awards, has recently ruled that a domestic arbitral award rendered out of an international commercial arbitration with its seat in India, is enforceable by the High Court itself under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. A Division Bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Rajeev Bharti, on December 16th, 2025, rejected a special appeal, stating that "the High Court is the 'Court' for filing an application under...
Domestic Award Pertaining To International Commercial Arbitration Enforceable By HC U/S 36 Of Arbitration Act: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that a domestic award pertaining to an international commercial arbitration is enforceable by High Court, which has the jurisdiction, under Section 36 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.The bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Rajeev Bharti held that“.. it is the High Court which is the 'Court' for filing an application under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for enforcement of a domestic award pertaining to an international...
Sole Arbitrator Returning Finding Based On Presumption, Modifying Agreement Vitiates Award: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that finding returned by a Sole Arbitrator based on presumption and which has the effect of modifying the agreement, vitiates the arbitral award.The bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh held “The Sole Arbitrator by returning a finding which is not based on any evidence and material on record and merely is based on presumption coupled with the fact that it has the effect of modifying the terms of the agreement and also amounts to...