|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 121 to 140 of 365 Records
-
1995 (2) TMI 359 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the payment of one fourth of the amount of auction-sale by cheque is a valid tender within the meaning of Rule 285-D of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952?
Held that:- It is settled law that the Provisions of Order 21, Rule 84, 85 and 86 of the Code of Civil Procedure are manda- tory and the provisions of Rules 285- D and 285-E being similar in terms of the aforementioned corresponding provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and in view of the aforesaid discussion there is no escape from declaring the sale a nullity if Rule 285-D is not complied with.
Deposit of 25 per cent of the bid amount by cheque will not be a valid tender within the meaning of the rule. Appeal allowed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 358 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
... ...
... ... ..... n the facts, with respect to his association with his father, for obvious reasons, namely, the father s clear involvement in smuggling activities, as existing on record of the customs authorities. It is clear from the reasons recorded which are on the basis of information received from the customs authorities that from 1962 onwards right up to 1977, and when the detention order was passed in 1978, there has been close liaison between the appellant and his father, Jagat Singh, and that the plea taken by him that he had nothing to do with his father is totally false. This is only to pinpoint the falsity of the position taken on basic facts by the appellant. The rest of the contentions as to the explanation regarding the source of acquisition of the properties, which are the subject-matter of forfeiture by virtue of the impugned order, have been discussed in detail by the learned Member, with which I am in full agreement. In view of the foregoing, the appeal is hereby dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 357 - SUPREME COURT
Whether the action of withdrawing the benefit under the Central Sales Tax Act by the notification dated May 7, 1990, found to be invalid by the High Court, is assailable?
Held that:- The claim of the respondents under the State Sales Tax Act being no longer pressed before us, and the facts relating to that being different since there was no restoration of that benefit, as was the case under the Central Sales Tax Act, the judgment of the High Court to that extent is set aside
Even after the impugned judgment of the High Court was rendered on January 12, 1993, eligibility certificates were issued to certain industrial units and a circular dated January 27, 1994 was also issued by the Director of Industries of the State Government on the same lines under which some benefit has been availed by those industrial units under the State Sales Tax Act. In these circumstances direct that the unavailed benefit under those eligibility certificates under the State Sales Tax Act would not be available to them but the extent to which the benefit under the State Act has been already availed up to April 4, 1994, the date on which the ex parte order of stay was made by this Court, on the basis of the eligibility certificate so issued, the State Government would not disturb that position by seeking to recover any amount under that head.
-
1995 (2) TMI 352 - SC ORDER
WORKS CONTRACT ... ... ... ... ..... tates that in an appropriate case where the judgment under appeal is relied upon in assessment proceedings or proceedings subsequent thereto, a challenge to the judgment shall be made. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
-
1995 (2) TMI 349 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... unsel for the appellants seeks leave to withdraw these appeals. He states that in an appropriate case where the judgment under appeal is relied upon in assessment proceedings or proceedings subsequent thereto, a challenge to the judgment shall be made. The appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
-
1995 (2) TMI 340 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Offences against the act to be cognizable only on complaints by registrar, etc. ... ... ... ... ..... ed by the High Court. The respondent has thus abused the process of law and obtained orders from the learned magistrate without disclosing true facts. This indicates that the complaint filed by respondent No. 2 is vexatious and malicious and is filed with an oblique motive. It is well settled that where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to splitting, then the proceedings are liable to be quashed. There is no manner of doubt that respondent No. 2 has abused the process of law. For the foregoing reasons, the application succeeds. Criminal Case No. 760 of 1994, filed in the court of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, by respondent No. 2 for the alleged commission of offence punishable under section 621A of the Companies Act, 1956, is hereby quashed. Rule is made absolute as indicated hereinabove.
-
1995 (2) TMI 334 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Winding up - Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... withheld as several deficiencies in conducting the internal audit were noticed. Those were indicated by letters dated February 16, 1987, and April 30, 1987, of the company to the firm and no satisfactory reply was received. The further question as to whom amount would be paid has remained unsolved. I do not consider this to be a fit case for accepting the prayer for winding up. There is no material to show that the company has reached a stage of commercial insolvency and is unable to pay its debts. On the other hand, as elaborately discussed above, there is a bona fide dispute about the claim of the petitioner. However, the accepted position is that the company has agreed to pay Rs. 10,000 on submission of the requisite authorisation by the firm and comply with other requirements as indicated by the company to the petitioner as well as the firm. I have no doubt that on compliance with the requirements the amount shall be paid. The petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed.
-
1995 (2) TMI 333 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Meetings Explanatory note to be annexed to notice, Directors -Remuneration of ... ... ... ... ..... ect to the approval of the general body as required by sub-section (2) of section 309. So, it is for the shareholders to consider whether the recovery should be made or the recovery should not be made and it is the internal management of the first respondent. The board of directors have also approved and passed the resolution. As rightly pointed out by Mr. T.K. Seshadri, if the resolution passed by the majority of shareholders is not given effect to, great prejudice would be caused to the second respondent, who was validly elected as a director at the annual general meeting, where the majority of shareholders have approved of his appointment. However, I have rendered the above finding on a prima facie consideration of the materials placed before me by both sides. This will not in any way affect the trial of the suit. 29. For the foregoing reasons, Application No. 5055 of 1994 is allowed and O A No. 708 of 1994 is dismissed and the interim order granted on 3-8-1994 is vacated.
-
1995 (2) TMI 332 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Court – Jurisdiction of, Company – Service of documents on members by, Meetings and proceedings - Presumptions to be drawn where minutes duly drawn and signed, Removal of director
-
1995 (2) TMI 330 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Recognition of stock exchanges ... ... ... ... ..... interview. The case of the respondents, however, is that Mr. Chandarana had not filed along with his application documents in support of his claim for experience and, therefore, the aggregate marks of Shri Chandarana were only 35 and not more than 36. While petitioner No. 3 contends that these certificates were submitted, the respondents contention is to the con- trary. Obviously, this is a disputed question of fact and this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution, cannot go into this aspect. Such grievances are best looked into by proceedings under section 111 of the Companies Act or by way of a civil suit and certainly not by way of a writ petition. We need not dwell on this aspect any further. 31. No other question survives for consideration. 32. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs. 33. Interim orders are vacated.
-
1995 (2) TMI 327 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Right of appeal against refusal of stock exchange to list securities ... ... ... ... ..... ain, in Kamaleshwar Prasad Mishra v. State of Bihar 1994 1 PLJR 613 the law has been laid down in the following terms There cannot be any doubt that in a given case the court may refuse to interfere with a matter where the right of a person is involved if thereby a greater public inconvenience could be caused which may be subject to payment of reasonable compensation as may be provided for to the persons aggrieved. In Birmingham and Midland Motor Omnibus Co. Ltd. v. Worcestershire County Council 1967 1 All ER 544 (Ch. D) it has been held that such an action must be justified in law. This aspect of the matter has also been reiterated in Anand Shanhar Prasad v. State of Bihar 1994 2 BLJ 1. For the reasons aforementioned, in my opinion, it is not a fit case in which this court should exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. This application is, therefore, dismissed but in the facts and circumstances of the case there will be no order as to costs.
-
1995 (2) TMI 304 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Free transferability and registration of transfer of listed securities ... ... ... ... ..... time of refusal, which was conveyed on 5-12-1992, this amended provision was not there in section 22A of the said Regulation Act, even then, in view of the aforesaid distinction between not a refusal to transfer but refusing only to split the shares, the section would not be attracted. 12. No doubt, L.A. Shri B.R. Shah, has drawn a distinction between word Law as used in clause (b) with reference to article 13 of the Constitution, but that being a larger question, in my opinion, when it is not required to be gone into, in light of the aforesaid discussion, I simply refer to it, but do not deal with it. 13. The net result is that the appeal succeeds. The Order of the Company Law Board is set aside. However, as stated above, it shall be open to the respondent herein to approach the company within one month from today with a request to the company to get the said lot of 5 shares transferred to the name or names as requested by the respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1995 (2) TMI 303 - HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
... ...
... ... ..... and expenses of the Transferor Company and the Transferee Company respectively in relation to or in connection with negotiations leading up to the Scheme and/or carrying out and complet- ing the terms and provisions of this Scheme and of and incidental to the completion of amalgamation and merger of the undertaking of the Transferor Company in pursuance of this Scheme shall be borne and paid by the Transferee Company. 15. In case this Scheme is not sanctioned by the Hon ble High Court of Uttar Pradesh at Allahabad and/or the Hon ble Guwahati High Court for any reason whatsoever or for any other reason, this Scheme cannot be implemented before 30th June, 1994 or within such further period or periods as may be agreed upon between the Transferor Company (by its Directors) and the Transferee Company (by its Directors), this Scheme shall become null and void and in that event no rights and liabilities shall accrue to or be incurred inter se by the parties in terms of this Scheme.
-
1995 (2) TMI 302 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Transfer to shares – Power to refuse registration and appeal against refusal, Oppression and Mismanagement
-
1995 (2) TMI 301 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Distribution of assets of notified parties ... ... ... ... ..... uestions. These answers vitally affect Banks/Financial Institutions, Revenue and notified parties. In the not too, distant future, distribution of the assets of Harshad Mehta group and of Fairgrowth Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. is to take place. It would be advisable that these questions get settled by the Supreme Court. The Court has noticed that in all matters the Custodian has, correctly, been only placing legal positions before this Court and accepting the judgments of this Court. The Custodian being an Officer of this Court, is taking no contentious attitude. These being important questions I direct the Custodian to file an Appeal in the Supreme Court within time. I also direct the Custodian to appear and make submissions in Appeals, if any, filed by any party. It is clarified that the Custodian is not to merely support this Ruling. The Custodian must canvas such legal submissions, including what was canvassed before this Court, as his legal adviser deems fit and proper.
-
1995 (2) TMI 300 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Oppression and mismanagement ... ... ... ... ..... art thereof. It is, however, distinctly separable and to my mind has been rightly excluded. 11. Having regard to this position, no interference is called for through the present appeal which accordingly fails and stands dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. After the judgment was pronounced, appellants learned advocate requested the Court to ensure that the status quo is maintained for a period of two weeks in order to enable the appellants to consider taking further steps in the matter. The position that emerges is that this Court has confirmed the view of the CLB that the CLB itself had no jurisdiction to pass any orders with regard to this particular part of the dispute, namely, the distributorship agreement. However, the respondents learned advocate on instructions from his client states that they are agreeable to defer whatever steps the company contemplates for a period of two weeks from today only. This statement is recorded.
-
1995 (2) TMI 299 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
remuneration of directors ... ... ... ... ..... he general body as required by sub-section (2) of section 309 of the Companies Act. So, it is for the shareholders to consider whether the recovery should be made or the recovery should not be made and it is the internal management of the first respondent. The board of directors have also approved and passed the resolution is rightly pointed out by Mr. T.K. Seshadri, if the resolution passed by the majority of shareholders is not given effect to, great prejudice would be caused to the second respondent, who was validly elected as a director at the annual general meeting, where the majority of shareholders have approved of his appointment. However, I have rendered the above finding on a prima facie consideration of the materials placed before me by both sides. This will not in any way affect the trial of the suit. For the foregoing reasons, Application No. 5055 of 1994 is allowed and O.A. No. 708 of 1994 is dismissed and the interim order granted on August 3, 1994, is vacated.
-
1995 (2) TMI 298 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Amalgamation ... ... ... ... ..... endra R. Sukhadia v. Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. 1987 3 Comp. LJ 141 (Guj.). That was also a case of amalgamation. In that case, it was held that the exchange ratio of the shares of the two companies, which were being amalgamated, had to be stated along with the notice of the meeting and how this exchange ratio was arrived at under section 393(1)(a). At one stage the company had offered to the objector to make arrange-ments for purchase of the objectors shares at a price of Rs. 5 higher than those prevailing on or before the time when the scheme was initially proposed. However, the objector declined to accept such offer. I do not think that the objector has made out any case for rejecting the sanctioning of the scheme. There will therefore be an order in terms of prayers (a) to ( j) of the petition of the petitioners dated 10-11-1994. There will be no order as to costs, save and except that the petitioners will pay the costs of the Central Government, assessed at 150 Gms.
-
1995 (2) TMI 297 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Recognition of stock exchanges - Guidelines for selection of members ... ... ... ... ..... interview. The case of the respondents, however, is that Mr. Chandarana had not filed along with his application documents in support of his claim for experience and, therefore, the aggregate marks of Shri Chandarana were only 35 and not more than 36. While petitioner No. 3 contends that these certificates were submitted, the respondents contention is to the con- trary. Obviously, this is a disputed question of fact and this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution, cannot go into this aspect. Such grievances are best looked into by proceedings under section 111 of the Companies Act or by way of a civil suit and certainly not by way of a writ petition. We need not dwell on this aspect any further. 31. No other question survives for consideration. 32. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in these writ petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs. 33. Interim orders are vacated.
-
1995 (2) TMI 294 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Power to make rules ... ... ... ... ..... sult, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned decisions as contained in the notifications and the communications thereof, copies whereof have been marked annexures 13 and 14 in C.W.J.C. No. 1761 of 1991, annexures 11 and 11-A in C.W.J.C. No. 1308 of 1991, annexures 12 and 13 in C.W.J.C. No. 2404 of 1991, annexures 11 and 12 in C.W.J.C, No. 1758 of 1991 and annexures 2 and 2-A in C.W.J.C. No. 1126 of 1991 are quashed. The council of management of the Magadh Stock Exchange is directed to reconsider the matter in the light of the observations made hereinabove and take appropriate decision in accordance with law within two months. The petitioners, however, will not be allowed to enter the ring and participate in transactions of sale and purchase of shares and securities in the meantime. The consequential benefits, if any, of the quashing of the impugned decisions shall abide by the fresh decision as aforesaid. There will be no order as to cost. Narayan Roy, J. mdash I agree.
............
|
