Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property/ Transactions Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Companies Law - High Court - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 9172 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 (9) TMI 1005 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  
  Auction Sale - Disbursement of the amount lying with the Official Liquidator pursuant to the auction sale - HELD THAT:- This Court has perused the report submitted by the Talati & Talati, Chartered Accountant dated 24th January 2020 together with Re-verification report dated 18th February 2020 for the claim of IDBI and State Bank of India - In view of the above fact situation, the Official Liquidator is directed to disburse the following amount from the balance lying in the account of the company in liquidation. The official liquidator is directed to verify the details of each of the worker and shall deposit the claim amount of each of the workers in their respective bank accounts directly by IMPS/RTGS/NEFT - The Official Liquidator is further directed that the amount payable to the secured creditors and unsecured creditors shall be d....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 852 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Issuance of summons to the petitioner - petitioner is one of the 287 persons/entities that are accused in the said complaint and against whom summons have been directed to be issued in terms of the impugned summoning order - offences under Sections 128, 129, 448 read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013. HELD THAT:- It is clear from the plain language of Section 16A(2)(b) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act that a Nominee Director would not incur any obligation or any liability by reason only of his being a director or for anything done or omitted to be done in good faith in discharge of his duties as a director or anything in relation thereto - It is also well settled that a Director cannot be vicariously held responsible for any offence committed by the company unless the relevant statute itsel....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 851 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Jurisdiction - elections to the Board of Directors (APEX Council) of a company - allegations of oppression and mismanagement - wrongful appointment of an Ombudsman in violation of Articles of Association - Whether adjudication can be done by a civil court or whether jurisdiction vests exclusively with the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)? - Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013. HELD THAT:- What emanates from the preceding arguments and on consideration of the comparative chart presented, is that sections 241, 242 and 244 of the Companies Act deal with all the issues which have been raised in the suit. The NCLT has been specifically conferred powers to address grievances relating to the affairs of the company, which may be prejudicial or oppressive to any member of the company, or for issues of appointment of directors. The appointme....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 807 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  
  Winding up of Company - Section 20(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - change of place of registered office of company - HELD THAT:- Considering the lapse of 17 years since the reference dated 20.12.2002 was received from the BIFR in the year 2002/2003 and the Financial Position of the Company as disclosed in the affidavit of the Company as also the Official Liquidator, as, the total assets and the net worth of the Company exceeds the liabilities, as also in view of the three arbitration awards in its favour and the affidavit of Bank of India dated 29.04.2013 this Court is of the view that as the recommendation of the BIFR is not binding and conclusive upon this Court in view of the Division Bench judgment relied upon by the Company's counsel upon the case of J.M. MALHOTRA AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF IN....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 750 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Removal of name of the Petitioner from the impugned “List of Disqualified Directors” prepared by the Respondents - change of status of the Petitioner in the records of the Respondents No.1 and 2 from “disqualified directors” - disqualified directors under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- In the case of MUKUT PATHAK & ORS., YOGESH KHANTWAL, AARTI KHANTWAL, AND VINEET WADHWA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. [2019 (11) TMI 319 - DELHI HIGH COURT], this Court has come to a categorical conclusion that the proviso to Section 167(1)(a) of the Act, which came into force w.e.f. 07.05.2018, cannot be applied retrospectively. In the present case, admittedly, the Company itself stood struck off the register on 30.06.2017 and was restored only on 22.10.2019, and the default on its part as also that o....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 657 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Winding up proceedings - Section 481 and Section 555 of the Companies Act, 1956 - HELD THAT:- This Company Court is of the opinion that it is just and reasonable in the circumstances of this case to order dissolution of said company. To be noted, there is one limb of prayer for deposit of this meagre amount also in the appropriate account in Reserve Bank of India under Section 555 of said Act. Before this Court does that, it is to be noticed that one limb of the prayer in captioned application, namely limb (b) talks about C.A.No.390 of 2013, which has been filed against ex-directors inter alia under Section 454(5)(A) of said Act. This captioned application and captioned CP are disposed of.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 308 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  
  Qualification/disqualification of some of the independent Board of Directors and one or more agenda scheduled on 17.08.2020 - misappropriation of funds - Section 422 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- Pertinently the legislature being aware of the hard pressed situation where the judicial manpower is disproportionately way far lower than the quantum of the litigation has used the expression "shall make an endevour" in Section 422 while binding the Tribunal to a time frame and thus the Tribunal, and for that matter all judicial forums being hard pressed with the cases on its file can only make an endevour for expeditious hearings with the limited manpower and infrastructure. Under such situation, the petition can be entertained with the aforesaid grievance only and only when the default on the part of the Tribunal is explic....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 266 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Admission of Winding up petition - appointment of the Official Liquidator as a Provisional Liquidator - only ground on which this petition can be dismissed is when the respondent company disputes the debt and such dispute is bona-fide and substantial - the respondent's case is that only 50% of the Bonds were restructured and the remaining 50% remained as Bonds. The Bonds were to be redeemed in December, 2012. Admittedly, to date even the admitted amounts due towards this 50% has not been paid. HELD THAT:- The Bond holder who had initially filed a term sheet agreeing to the restructuring of the FCCB in principle has thereafter on 02.02.2011 expressed in writing their intention not to go ahead with restructuring which was reiterated in August, 2011 and forwarded to the respondent as attachment to Email dated 17.08.2011. The notice for d....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 265 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Vires of the proviso under Section 167(2)(a) of the Act which was inserted to the Companies (Amendment Act 2017) - disqualification with respect to Directorship of 'Public' companies - Principles of Natural Justice - HELD THAT:- The issue decided in the case of KHUSHRU DORAB MADAN VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2020 (1) TMI 1212 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that the three financial years 2014-2015, 2015-16 and 2016-17 have been completed and since annual returns / financial statements have not been filed, disqualification automatically follows and when disqualification is incurred, deactivation of Director Identification Number also automatically follows. The DIN number can exist only during the life time of post of Directorship and not for the entire life of the individual. Issuing a prior notice would be of no avail and would only be an empty formality since the provision of law is clear on this aspect. Petition dismissed.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 175 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Striking off the name of Kushal Power from the Register of the Companies - non-filing of financial statements and annual returns - disqualification of directors - Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The judgment in MUKUT PATHAK & ORS., YOGESH KHANTWAL, AARTI KHANTWAL, AND VINEET WADHWA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. [2019 (11) TMI 319 - DELHI HIGH COURT], insofar as the merits of the case is concerned, is squarely applicable in the present case. The said judgment clearly holds that the proviso to Section 167(1)(a) of the Act cannot be read to operate retrospectively. It was further held that the said proviso, being a punitive measure with respect to the rights and obligations of directors, cannot be applied retrospectively unless the statutory amendment expressly provides so. In the present case, the facts and c....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 174 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT
  
  Specific performance of agreements for sale - Principles of Indoor Management - respondent contended that the appellants had not made out any prima facie case to obtain any order of temporary injunction in their favour; that balance of convenience is in fact in favour of the 1st respondent because it was a real estate Company and doing business successfully - HELD THAT:- It is a settled principle in Company Law that if a person deals with a Company or any other representative of a Company who is exercising the powers of Management and directing its business and affairs, that person is not affected by the lacuna of procedure within the Company or by its failure to fulfill conditions which are required by the Company's Memorandum or Articles to be fulfilled before the transaction. Such outsider is not bound to enquire whether acts of in....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 173 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Validity of proceeding with the civil suit - dispute between the parties is covered under the provisions of the Companies Act or not - whether after incorporation of Section 430 of The Companies Act, 2013 w.e.f. 1.6.2016, the civil Court is barred to proceed with the civil suit already pending before it? HELD THAT:- In the present case, the parties are at variance with regard to the issue of duplicate share certificate. In the backdrop of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in SHRIPAL JAIN VERSUS TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ORS. [1995 (3) TMI 494 - SC ORDER] and followed by the Bombay High Court in NINE MEDIA & INFORMATION SERVICES LTD. VERSUS HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD. & OTHERS [2016 (10) TMI 370 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and the aforestated provisions of the Companies Act, in the facts and circumstances of the present ca....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 167 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Disqualification of Directors - defaulting directors - Automatic vacancy of officer of director - Deactivation of the DIN of the defaulting directors - HELD THAT:- Issue covered in the decision of MUKUT PATHAK & ORS., YOGESH KHANTWAL, AARTI KHANTWAL, AND VINEET WADHWA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. [2019 (11) TMI 319 - DELHI HIGH COURT] where it was held that the office of a director shall become vacant by virtue of Section 167(1)(a) of the Act on such director incurring the disqualifications specified under Section 164(1) of the Act. It shall also become vacant on the directors incurring the disqualification under Section 164(2) of the Act after 07.05.2018. However, the office of the director shall not become vacant in the company which is in default under sub-section 164(2) of the Act. Petition disposed off.

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 166 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  
  Maintainability of petition - condoantion of delay in filing petition - Disqualification of Directors - Section 164 of Companies Act - publication of their names in the List of disqualified Directors - unfreeze their Director Identification Number (DIN) and Digital signatures certificates - only explanation sought to be offered by Mr. Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that they were unaware of the publication of the aforesaid List till recently. He however concedes that there is no explanation offered in the petition for the delay. HELD THAT:- The aforesaid submission is not acceptable. Ignorance cannot bestow any benefit on a litigant and nor can it be a ground to condone a delay of almost three years in approaching the court for relief. The petitioners had been disqualified for a period of five years commencing fro....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 131 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT
  
  Initiation of Inquiry - case of the respondents is that the inquiry or investigation under Section 212 of the Act, will in no way affect the functioning of the company or its employees and its reputation, as contended by the petitioner - company. Whether the inquiry initiated by the Central Government and the report dated 24.02.2020 submitted by the 5th respondent - Registrar of Companies, is in conformity with Section 206(4) of the Act? - HELD THAT:- Since the petitioner submitted a detailed reply dated 03.02.2020, and it has also invited an order of this court dated 14.02.2020 in W.P.No.3143 of 2020, directing the respondents to proceed with the inquiry under Section 206(1) of the Act by duly taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner - company on 03.02.2020, and the 5th respondent in compliance with the direc....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 130 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
  
  Proceedings in NCLT - part physical and part virtual hearing - Maintainability of application - infringement of Fundamental Rights - learned Single Judge declined to entertain the writ application essentially on the ground that none of the fundamental rights or any legal rights of the appellant herein could be said to have been infringed by the NCLT in adopting a particular mode of hearing - the learned Single Judge rejected the writ application by imposing costs of ₹ 10,000/-. Whether the learned Single Judge committed any error in rejecting the writ application? HELD THAT:- The Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BAR ASSOCIATION [2013 (2) TMI 381 - SUPREME COURT] has held that Article 227 of the Constitution stipulates that every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals through....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 129 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Time Limitation for issuance of SCN - case of respondent is that once the respondent had knowledge of the offence, the respondent issued the show cause notices during February, 2005 and filed the complaints during July, 2005. Hence, the complaints have been filed well within the limitation period - HELD THAT:- In the present case, no date was mentioned in the complaints as to when inspection under Section 209 A of the Companies Act, 1956, was conducted. Hence, it is presumed that the date on which the balance sheets have been filed is the date of knowledge of making the false statements. The balance sheets have been filed on 31.03.2001 and 31.03.2002 respectively, hence, the respondent had knowledge of the alleged irregularities under the Companies Act during March, 2001 and March, 2002 respectively, itself, however, they issued the show ....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 128 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  
  Dividend declared but not claimed for more then 7 years - the petitioner is an 81 year old woman who was not aware even about the existence of the shares until recently on 2019 - the shares were acquired by her son who died on 1993 - transfer of such amount to Investor Education and Protection Fund (IEPF) - Validity of of Section 124 (6) of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rule 6 and 7 of the Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Rules, 2016 - violative of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India or not - It is the contention of the petitioner that Section 124 of the Companies Act, 2013 corresponds to Section 205 A of the Companies Act, 1956 - It is the contention of the petitioner that failure to claim dividends cannot amount to divesting the rights in the shares which is proper....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 81 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Review petition - error apparent on the face of record or not - Interpretation of statute - Section 529A read with Section 529 of the Companies Act, 1956 - mortgage property - preferential claims have not been appreciated by this Court. HELD THAT:- It is evident from the grounds raised for reviewing the judgment that petitioners are trying to re-argue the points, which have already been decided by this Court, after considering facts and circumstances placed before it as well as provisions of Section 529 read with Section 529A of the Act - The petitioners cannot be allowed to re-agitate points in review petition, which have already been decided by this Court. A decision not accepting the plea of a party, but passed after taking into consideration entire facts and circumstances brought on record and considering pronouncements of the Apex Co....... + More

---

• 2020 (9) TMI 80 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
  
  Whether on mere change of the name of a Company with the approval of the Registrar, in terms of Section 21 and 23 of the Companies Act 1956 {Section 13(2) of the Companies Act 2013}, sale/transfer of its immovable property takes place and stamp duty chargeable on its value or not? HELD THAT:- The stand of the respondents that the present is not a case of mere change of name and rather a case of conversion of public limited company to private limited company, hence stamp duty is chargeable under Section 3 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 though has been taken by the respondents-State to make an attempt just to mislead this Court and confuse the whole issue, however, unsuccessfully. Section 3 of the Stamp Act speaks about the instruments, which are chargeable with duties, subject to the exemptions contained in Schedule-I. The instrument referr....... + More

---