2018 (4) TMI 1249 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Surat Goods Transport Pvt. Ltd. Versus Essar Projects (India) Ltd.
Winding up petition - unable to pay the debt - limitation period - Held that - We cannot dismiss the stand taken by the company that petitioner has not even made out a prima facie case that there is a debt. - So far as the issue of limitation is concerned, in the reminder letter dated 4th February 2015, copy whereof is at Exh. D to the petition, it is stated that petitioner had raised Thirty bills between 31st January 2011 to 29th September 2012 ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1111 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Zenith Limited Versus Grand Foundry Limited
Contravention of Scheme sanctioned by BIFR - application to NCLT for appropriate orders - Held that - Since the company has contravened the Scheme sanctioned by BIFR, petitioner has to make an application to the NCLT for liquidation order of the company. - The records and proceedings in this matter be transferred to NCLT, Mumbai and petitioner will be at liberty to take out an appropriate application to NCLT for appropriate orders as required und....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1047 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Jalaram Flexo Laminates Private Ltd. Versus Polypet Flexible Packaging Private Limited,
Non disclosure of cause of action for filing the suit and that the suit was also barred by limitation - Held that - The cause of action was already pleaded when the suit was filed and that the trial Court has not relied upon averments in amended paragraph 21A, ratio of the decision in Patasibai and ors. (1990 (1) TMI 321 - SUPREME COURT) cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. The question whether the amendment could have been allowed....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 919 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Mr. O.K. Varghese, Mr. O.K. Kuriappan, M/s. Spectron Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Ms. Elsy Anthony, Versus M/s. OFS Industries (P) Ltd., O.K. Augusty, Mr. O.K. Jose, Mrs. Vasanthi Ramappa Kanchan, and Mr. H.R. Kanchan,
Oppression and mismanagement - Held that - Appellant no.1 had responded to all allegations and had pointed out that the payment to Barkha lnds had been made in the normal course of business and respondent no.2 s allegation that the company did not need such service/ software was baseless; that the amount debited to SCA International was the commission earned by respondent no.1 company, i.e., income generated by the company and not money taken fro....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 732 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Dev Chander Sood & Ors. Versus H.L. Sud & Ors.
Grant of a preliminary decree for partition of property - defendants has argued that the plaintiff No.1 was thrown out from the HUF since he had sold some other properties of the HUF - Held that - A preliminary decree for partition be drawn up. - On enquiry, it is informed that the property is constructed over land admeasuring 200 sq. yds. and comprises of ground, first and half second floors and is not divisible by metes and bounds. No purpose w....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 731 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Neeraj Batra Versus M/s. PSA Nitrogen Ltd.
Winding up petition - existence of eligible outstanding debt - Held that - A clear case is made out in this case that the respondents are despite having admitted the dues of ₹ 13,23,057/- refusing to pay. Respondent company is hence unable to pay its debt. - Keeping in view the above, the petition is admitted and the Official Liquidator attached to this Court is appointed as the Provisional Liquidator. He is directed to take over all the as....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 549 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Getamber Anand & Anr. Versus Anil Kumar Saha
Breach of MOU - transfer of shares of ATS Estate Pvt. Ltd. - bar on contracts - Held that - Arbitral Tribunal noted that petitioner no.1, in his crossexamination, had stated that the shares of ATS Estate Pvt. Ltd would have been transferred to the respondent whenever a buyer for the same was found. However, the MOU did not stipulate that transfer of shares of ATS Estate Pvt. Ltd. to the respondent would be contingent upon the investor(s) being lo....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 548 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Jean Lavabre Dominique S/o Mr. Jean Chlaude Versus Voyager Hotels & Motels Private Limited, Jaideep Singh Chandela, Ashraf Khan Parvez c/o Shri Jaideep Singh Chandela, Piyush Mishra
Removal of director - reconstitution of Board of the Directors of the Respondent Company alleging that the affairs of the Company are being mismanaged and conducted in a manner oppressive to other member - Held that - Bare perusal of the order dated 12.5.09 reveals that the parties agreed that the Appellant herein shall go out of the company for total consideration of ₹ 3.25 crores to be paid by the Respondents. But at the same time, the ti....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 547 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Panday Minerals Private Limited, Laxmi Narayan Panday s/o Shri Amrit Lal Panday, Mohit Panday S/o Shri Prabash Panday, Rakhee Panday w/o Mr. Rohit Panday, Prabhash Panday s/o Laxmi Narayan Panday, Vimla Panday w/o Prabha Panday, Rohit Panday s/o Prabhash Panday, Ritika Panday Versus Sanjay Sukhwal s/o Late Shri Laxmi Narayan Sukhwal, Registrar of Companies, Deepak Vijaywargiya S/o Vishwasnath Vijaywargiya
Oppression and mismanagement - Appointment of Ms. Rakhi Pandey as Director of the Company - no notice was given to the first Respondent and the Appellant no.2 herein was the only Director present in the meeting and thus, for want of proper quorum - illegal transfer of the shares - Held that - There is no evidence on record showing that notice of Extra-ordinary General Meeting held on 9.10.09 was given to the first respondent, wherein the paid up ....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 486 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Alex Philip Versus Ramangalam Tile Works Company Ltd., The Tahsildar, Office of The Tahsildar And P.V. Prabhakaran, Revenue Divisional Officer, Muvattupuzha
Sale conducted become void under provisions of Section 536 of the Companies Act, 1953 - Held that - Learned Judge in the company court has not gone deep into the above said aspects. Question as to whether the sale itself was void ab initio by virtue of provisions contained in Section 537 (1) (b) or under Section 536 (2); or as to whether there existed any reasons to hold the sale otherwise than void, has not been seen examined. - The factual aspe....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 234 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. Versus Wellman Logistics Pvt. Ltd.
Winding up petition - Held that - Right of the petitioning creditor to obtain payment of the principal amount of ₹ 5,15,31,045/-, together with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per annum from the date of the notice issued u/s 434 of the Act of 1956 till the date of actual payment has attained finality and this Court does not have any scope to deviate from such finding. - Admittedly, the company has failed to pay the entire amount as direct....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 164 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
M/s. Rojee-Tasha Stampings Private Ltd., Automotive Metal Stampings Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Ganage Pressings Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Poona Tools Pvt. Ltd., Versus POSCO-India Pune Processing Centre Pvt. Ltd.
Winding up petition - whether company petitions were not maintainable, for the reason that the respondent had received the amounts due and payable by the company from its insurers KSure- Korea ? - Held that - If there is subrogation in favour of the insurer, the insurer as subrogee can file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act either in the name of the assured as his attorney holder or in the joint names of the assured and the insurer, f....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 163 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Emecon Controls Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s. PSA Nitrogen Limited & Ors.
Winding up petition - proof of debt as due under section 433(e) of the Companies Act - winding up petition has been filed as pending claim for a sum of ₹ 1,10,467/- and the second is the outstanding C-Forms for the year 2011-12 - Held that - Despite several orders of this court the respondent has failed to supply the said C-Forms. Alongwith CA 1840/2013 the respondent had also placed on record photocopies of C-Forms. Despite this, the origi....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1553 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. MRF Limited Versus Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) Rep. By Secretary to Government, Government of India, Competition Commission of India (CCI) Rep. by its Secretary, Additional Director General (DG) Competition Commission of India, All India Tyre Dealers' Federation (AITDF) , M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd, M/s. CEAT Ltd., M/s. J.K. Tyres & Industries Ltd, M/s. Birla Tyres Ltd. And Automotive Tyre Manufacturers' Association (ATMA)
Inquiry into certain agreements and dominant position of enterprise - Procedure for scrutiny of information or reference - Opinion on existence of prima facie case - whether the writ petition is maintainable against the order made under Section 26(1) since there is no appealable remedy available under the said Act? - Held that - The direction issued under Section 26(1) is a direction simpliciter and an administrative direction without entering up....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1438 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Vedanta Ltd. (Formerly M/s Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Versus Ms. Roopa G. Pai, Karvy Computer Share Pvt. Ltd.
Prayer seeking re-instatement of shares in the name of the first respondent by directing the appellant to rectify the register of members - Held that - There is absolutely no material to hold that the first respondent was put on notice, received the option form as per approved scheme and the cheque sent. - A fraud was committed against the first respondent though not by the appellant, but by some one acted on its behalf, resulting in registration....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1437 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Avani Projects And Infrastructure Ltd. Versus Ornate Tradcom Pvt. Ltd.
Application for winding up - cheques dishonored - liability to pay the amount - Held that - The financial accommodation/loan of ₹ 60 lakhs from the petitioner and as recorded in the letters dated July 17, 2013 and September 7, 2014 the respondent company was liable to repay the said amount to the petitioner together with the agreed rate of interest. - In order to discharge its obligation, the company had issued two post dated cheques of ....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1336 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Rajan Goel Versus Union of India And Anr.
Disqualifying the petitioner as Director in the company - default in submitting returns with regard to the affairs of the said company which was statutorily required to be filed with the Registrar of Companies for a continuous period of three financial years - Held that - The writ petitioner has stated that on account of differences and disputes with the other Directors, the company had run into difficulty and statutory compliances in the nature ....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1294 - DELHI HIGH COURT
In Re: Avtar Manufacturing Private Limited (in Vol. Liqn.)
Voluntary Winding up - Held that - OL has scrutinized the records submitted by the Voluntary Liquidator, and has recorded satisfaction that necessary compliances of Sections 484 to 497 and other relevant provisions of the Act read with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 have been made, and that the affairs of the said Company have not been conducted in a manner prejudicial to the interest of its members or to the public. The OL, in these circumsta....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1293 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Balvir Singh Versus Securities & Exchange Board of India & Ors.
Attachment orders - collective investment scheme - SEBI found fault in the scheme - Recovery Officer has attached all accounts, lockers whether held singly or jointly by the petitioner - Held that - The petitioner has been able to make out the case that the order which has been passed is non-est as it takes away a vital right conferred upon the notice/defaulter under Clause 2 of the Second Schedule of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, the im....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1253 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Aditya Prakash Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Versus Magikwand Media Pvt. Ltd.
Preference shareholders cannot be called creditors to attend the meeting of the creditors of the company to be held under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 - Held that - As already held that petitioner cannot be a creditor and it is rather clear that redemption cannot be made except out of profits of the company which would otherwise be available for dividend or out of the proceeds of a fresh issue of shares made for the purposes of the rede....... + More
Search 
