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 9119 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 185
  
  Validity of undated document disclosing a DIN status which shows that the petitioner has been disqualified by the Registrar of Companies under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- On perusing the relevant documents, although the impugned DIN Status indicating the disqualification of the petitioner by the ROC is not dated, paragraph 6 of the writ petition states that the petitioner had renewed his digital signature (DSC) on 17th January, 2020. The petitioner came to know of the impugned document in March, 2020 which has been stated in paragraph 6 of the writ petition. It can therefore be assumed that the impugned document is after January, 2020 and before March, 2020 when the petitioner came to know of it. Section 168(2) of the 2013 Act is very clear. The resignation of a Director takes immediate effect from the date on ....... + More

---

• 2020 (7) TMI 91
  
  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
  
  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 458
  
  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 360
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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
  
  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

---

• 2020 (5) TMI 429
  
  Bail application - applicant has chosen to file the present bail application under sections 439 Cr.P.C. for immediate release till such time that the pandemic COVID-19 (Corona Virus) is curtailed - main case of applicant is that due to Covid-19 (Corona Virus) infection, the applicants being a sick person has great risk to his life if he is kept in jail where there are much chances of he being infected by said Corona Virus - HELD THAT:- It is apparent that the Committee has resolved to release the under trial prisoners on interim bail, who are facing criminal cases in which the maximum sentence is of 7 years and presently confined in jails, for a period of eight weeks by the competent courts. Thus, the contention of Assistant Solicitor General Sri Gyan Prakash appearing on behalf of the respondent, who vehemently argued that the applicant ....... + More

---