|
Advanced Search Options
Companies Law - Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 12071 Records
More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.
- 2020 (7) TMI 91 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reimbursement of liquidation expenses of vessels/tugs - winding up of company - HELD THAT:- The official liquidator has rightly rejected the claim for supply of food provision on board on 4th September, 2017 in the sum of ₹ 42,040/-. The claim for port charges in the sum of ₹ 6,51,473/- is rightly rejected on the ground that official liquidator had taken possession on 6th February, 2018 and as the same were neither approved by this Court nor informed to the official liquidator prior to incurring such expenses and thus could not be considered as liquidation expenses. The manning expenses were incurred by the applicant without permission of this Court and without conveying such expenses to the official liquidator before taking possession by the official liquidator. The official liquidator rightly rejected the claim for reimburse....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 663 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Fraud/cheating - damaged/second hand vehicle - primary allegation of the complainant/respondent No. 2 is that all the petitioners have cheated her by giving a different vehicle, which was not booked by her and the said vehicle was second-hand defective vehicle, for which she cannot run the vehicle - HELD THAT:- The selling of vehicle by the manufacturer to the dealer and the purchase of vehicle by customer from the dealer by its own choice by executing all necessary documents and it is a purely business transaction. The dealer while selling a vehicle obviously explained the features/benefits to its customer and equally the customer by its option purchased such vehicle and such transaction cannot be termed as an inducement on the part of the manufacturer/dealer/ sub-dealer within the purview of law. In the given case, there is nothing to r....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 652 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL — KOCHI BENCH
Oppression and Mismanagement - Transfer of Shares - siphoning of funds - act of oppression against the minority shareholders or not - petition filed after a delay of 4 years of cause of action - failure on the part of respondents in their capacity as directors of the company to comply with the fiduciary duty towards expulsion of petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 - increase of share capital. Whether the company petition filed after a delay of 4 years of cause of action is maintainable? - HELD THAT:- The facts are overwhelmingly loaded against the respondents as the acts of oppression and mismanagement are continuing till date. Considering the facts of the present case the petitioners are continuously knocking the doors of various forums to redress their grievances since 2010 and finally filed this petition on April 5, 2013 under sections 397, 398 a....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 458 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Rejection of prayer of the petitioner for delivery of possession of the premises/flat - Sub-Section (2) of the Section 452 of Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The scheme referred to, the quarter/premises being part of the entitlement in terms of service and the settled principles of law which have spelt out the proposition regarding the provisions of Sub-Section (2) of Section 452 of the Companies Act (earlier Sub-Section (2) of Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956), I am of the opinion that the accused/opposite party is unnecessarily dragging the issue relating to vacating the quarter/premises belonging to the company on different pretext. In view of the conduct of the accused/opposite party and the provisions of law along with the settled principles, it can be held that the order dated 17- 4-2019 passed by the Ld. ACJM, Durgapur is n....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 394 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOCHI BENCH
Maintainability of petition - oppression and mismanagement - Stay of the Extra Ordinary General Meeting - whether the Petitioners were successful in making out a case for interference by this Tribunal by invoking Section 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013? - HELD THAT:- The reading of Sections 397 and 398 provides a right to members of a company who comply with the conditions of Section 399 (Section 244 of the New Act) to apply to the court for relief under section 402 of the Old Act (Section 242 of the New Act) or such other reliefs as may be suitable in the circumstances of the case, if the affairs of a company are being conducted in a manner oppressive to any member or members including any one or more of those applying. Therefore, we have to understand Section 399 of Old Act (Corresponding to Section 249 of New Act) to arrive at a....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 360 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Whether Section 391 (6) of the Act empowered this Court to interdict the process, set in motion by the complaint, dated 15th February, 2019, addressed by NSDC to the EOW? HELD THAT:- The criminal proceedings cannot be stayed, under Section 391 (6) of the Act. “Civil proceedings” alone can be so stayed. In the present case, pursuant to the complaint, dated 15th February, 2019, addressed by NSDC to the EOW, the record reveals that the EOW is merely looking into the matter, for which purpose it had called the applicant, to appear before it, vide the notice dated 23rd April, 2019 supra. The said notice cannot even be termed a “show cause notice”, as it merely states that the complaint of NSDC was being looked into, and requested the applicants to appear, before it, in that regard. No action, prejudicial to the applican....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 344 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Maintainability of application before NCLT - Notification dated 24.3.2020 issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi - default in the present case was below rupees one Crore - HELD THAT:- This issue has not been discussed by the National Company Law Tribunal at all. The petitioner is therefore permitted to approach against the said order dated 5.5.2020 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, or file a review application before the NCLT itself. We are not inclined to entertain the present civil revision petition and we leave it free for the petitioner to approach the National Company Law Tribunal itself or the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be, for raising the said issue. The amendment Notification dated 24.3.2020 depends upon the facts of the case and unless this iss....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 261 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Grant of Bail - collusion in fraud - petitioner has been charge-sheeted under section 447 of the new Companies Act - HELD THAT:- There are no substance in the argument of the learned Counsel for the SFIO that the twin conditions prescribed under section 212(6) of the New Companies Act, 2013 start with negation of bail to the accused and the court could grant bail to such an accused only if the court records a satisfaction qua the accused being ‘not guilty’ of the alleged offence and also a satisfaction that if released on bail the accused is not likely to commit any similar offence again. Also this court does not find substance in the insistence of the learned counsel for the SFIO that the application of the twin conditions, as prescribed under Section 212(6), are mandatory and have to be applied to all the considerations of g....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 93 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Disqualification from appointment as a Director - change of status of the petitioner in the records of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from the list of disqualified directors - unfreezing of Directors Identification Number and the Digital Signature Certificate (DSC) of the petitioner - Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- It is apparent that the petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No. 1 and 2 not to consider the petitioner as a disqualified director under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 and for a further direction to change the status of the petitioner in the records of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from the list of disqualified directors and consequently unfreeze the Directors Identification Number and the Digital Signature Certificate (DSC) of the petitioner - The....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 65 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction of Writ Court - Transfer of shares - case of petitioner is that the 2nd respondent illegally misused the DP share transfer forms and committed fraud, cheating, breach of trust by transferring the share of 4.5% in their name, though the said transfer was directed to be kept in abeyance - HELD THAT:- The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decision in JAI SINGH AND ORS. VERSUS MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR. AND VICE-VERSA [2010 (9) TMI 1235 - SUPREME COURT] has considered the nature and scope of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and held that The Exercise of jurisdiction must be within the well-recognised constraints. It cannot be exercised like a 'bull in a china shop' to correct all errors of judgment of a court, or tribunal, acting within the limits of its jurisdiction. This corrrect....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 18 - MADHYA HIGH COURT
Fresh re-auction order - reserve price reduced in fresh auction - Company under liquidation - there was no participant in the first round - No cogent reason is reflected from the orders passed by the learned Company Judge in respect of grant of permission relating to reduction in the reserve price and re-auction was held - HELD THAT:- If the Court feels that the price offered in the auction is not the adequate price, the Court can certainly order for re-auction and in the present case, a person i.e. present appellant has offered ₹ 2,80,00,000/- more in the matter, and therefore, fresh auction is inevitable. Another important aspect of the case is that the sale was confirmed on 02.03.2020 in presence of advocate of respondent No.2 with a direction to deposit entire sale consideration within a period of 60 days from the date of the or....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 17 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Reference of matter for arbitration - Works Contract - Invitation for tender for carrying out the balance work - privity of contract or not - Petition had sent pre-termination notice to respondent no.4, on the ground that respondent no. 4 had committed delay and breaches against the contractual delivery date of 12 months i.e. by 17th January, 2014 the respondent no.4 was not in a position to complete the said works - Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 - HELD THAT:- There is no privity of contract between the petitioner and respondents no. 2 and 3 - In view of various clauses of the contract, there is nothing on record to show that respondent no.4 had taken consent of the petitioner to give sub- contract to respondent no.2, who in turn gave further sub- contract to respondent no.3. Moreover, this Court in order dated....... + More
- 2020 (6) TMI 16 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Suppression of facts - Change in management - the petitioners did not seek any permission from BIFR for any change in the management - increase in authorized share capital - HELD THAT:- It appears that there are disputed questions of facts as stated by both the sides on affidavit. Moreover, it is also not in dispute that BIFR was functional when the interim order was passed by this Court. It appears that the petitioners have suppressed the material facts on record when the interim order was passed by this Court by pointing out that resolution dated 27.11.2015 was contrary to the directions of the BIFR in its order dated 18.2.2009. However, the petitioners did not point out that BIFR had already sanctioned the scheme on 17.7.2013 after taking into consideration the order dated 18.2.2009 and subsequent various orders passed from time to tim....... + More
- 2020 (5) TMI 582 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Change of physical status of land - resume of possession of land - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view that such a prayer cannot be granted at this stage, when there are no specific facts asserted on affidavit by the applicant as to when and by whom was the applicant informed about alleged construction activities on the subject land and the exact nature of such construction activities. Thus, there is no occasion for directing the Official Liquidator to file an affidavit to demonstrate that the physical condition of the subject land as was in existence in August, 2019 continues to be so on date. Application dismissed.
- 2020 (5) TMI 565 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Principles of Res-Judicata - Maintainability of application - Winding up order - physical condition and status of the lands, over which the applicant claims a right - HELD THAT:- It defies comprehension as to how, in the face of the order, dated 24th April, 2020, and the observations entered, by this Court, in para 7 thereof, the applicant could maintain yet another application, with the very same prayer, without curing the defects/defaults highlighted in para 7 of the said order. There is no question, here, of application of the principle of res judicata. The fact of the matter is that an application containing an identical relief, already stands dismissed, by this Court, on the ground that such prayers could not be urged without, in the first instance, placing specific facts, on affidavit, regarding the alleged construction activities, ....... + More
- 2020 (5) TMI 560 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Transfer of shares pending - right to subscribe for rights issue - HELD THAT:- The urgency expressed by the applicants is on account of the rights issue announced by Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL). The applicants claim that certain shares of RIL, which are registered in the name of CRB Capital Markets Limited (CCML) belong to them and their applications for transferring the said shares are pending. They claim that they should also be entitled to subscribe the rights shares of RIL based on their claim to shares of RIL registered in the name of CCML. This Court is not persuaded to accept that the rights entitlement of CCML to subscribe to the shares of RIL ought to be renounced in favour of the applicants. However, it the duty of the Official Liquidator to ensure that maximum value is realised for the assets of the CCML. If the shares of RIL....... + More
- 2020 (5) TMI 559 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Transfer of shares pending - entitlement to subscribe right shares - HELD THAT:- This Court is not persuaded to accept that the rights entitlement of CCML to subscribe to the shares of RIL ought to be renounced in favour of the applicants. However, it the duty of the Official Liquidator to ensure that maximum value is realised for the assets of the CCML. If the shares of RIL are not subscribed or renounced, the entitlement would lapse and the same would be of no benefit to CCML or the applicants. In the circumstances, this Court considers it apposite to direct that its rights entitlement of CCML to subscribe to RIL’s shares be sold at the maximum value as available. Application disposed off.
- 2020 (5) TMI 541 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - refusal to transfer the shares - principal grievance of the appellant in this appeal as well as as argued by the counsel for the appellant is, that the Company Judge has erred in disposing of the application of the appellant, without considering the merits thereof and in terms of the order dated 13th May, 2020 in applications of others and to which the appellant was not a party - HELD THAT:- The appellant, after the alleged purchase of shares in 1997 and refusal of transfer thereof to its name soon thereafter, remained quiet for nearly 14 years, till about October, 2011 when CA No.2436/2011 was filed for directions for transfer of the shares to its name and which application was opposed by the counsel for OL and probably owing to which opposition, the then counsel for the appellant deemed it appropriate to ....... + More
- 2020 (5) TMI 540 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Grant of Interim Bail - COVID-19 pandemic situation - main thrust which has been canvassed by learned counsel for the applicants is that due to Covid-19 (Corona Virus) infection, the applicants being diabetic patients have great risk to their lives if they are kept in jail where there are much chances of they being infected by Corona Virus - HELD THAT:- As a result of fraudulent activities, the Company has defaulted against outstanding liabilities of ₹ 3578/- crores approximately to Banks and Public Financial Institutions thereby causing wrongful loss to them and their acts and omission are punishable under section 447 and 448 of the Companies Act, 2013. Learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondents through his objection filed has drawn the attention of the Court that the applicants have been arrested fo....... + More
- 2020 (5) TMI 450 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Admiralty Act - action in rem - Is there a conflict between actions in rem filed under the Admiralty (Jurisdiction and Settlement of Maritime Claims) Act, 2017 and the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and if so, how is the conflict to be resolved? - HELD THAT:- An action in rem can be filed and the ship arrested before the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC comes into force or during the moratorium period or even when the corporate debtor is ordered to be liquidated. A maritime claimant ought to be permitted to enforce his right in rem and obtain an order of arrest of the ship in question. This will enable him to perfect and / or crystallize his maritime lien or maritime claim as available to him under the Admiralty Act. The action in rem will not proceed till the moratorium is in place. This will ensure that the rig....... + More
........
|
