|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 101 to 120 of 508 Records
-
1998 (7) TMI 556 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in company petition No. 596 of 1991. After having heard the learned counsel both the sides and after having gone through the record, I find that the company petition can be admitted and the company can be wound up under section 433 of the Companies Act only if the Court finds that the company is not in a position to pay its debts. The very fact that the applicant company has deposited an amount of Rs. 1,50,000 within a period of one week as directed by this Court by its order dated 30-6-1997 shows that the company is in a position to pay its debts. It is further to be seen that the order dated 4-4-1997 is an ex parte order passed without hearing the applicant. In this background, taking overall view of the matter, in my opinion, company application No. 301 of 1997 deserves to be granted in terms of prayer clause (a). The application is therefore granted in terms of prayer clause ( a) with costs. SCL q MARCH 20, 1999
-
1998 (7) TMI 555 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Circumstances in which a company may be wound up ... ... ... ... ..... ter, in my opinion, interest of justice would be served by directing the respondent to deposit an amount of Rs. 1 crore in this Court within a period of one month with due intimation to the petitioner. The petitioner may file a civil suit in the civil court for recovery of the amount within a period of eight weeks from the receipt of the intimation. The disposal of the amount deposited in this Court shall be governed by the orders that may be passed by the civil court in the civil suit to be filed by the petitioner. In case the amount is so deposited, this petition shall stand disposed of. In case the amount is not deposited, this petition shall stand admitted. In case the petitioner fails to file a civil suit within the aforesaid period, the amount deposited by the respondent be refunded to the respondent. In case the amount is deposited, the Prothonotary and Senior Master to invest that amount in a nationalised bank initially for a period of six months. SCL q APRIL 20, 1999
-
1998 (7) TMI 553 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Charges - Registration of charges ... ... ... ... ..... guarantee given by the defendant No. 2 by letter of guarantee dated 21-9-1984 upto a limit of the sum of Rs. 12 lakh and interest thereon as mentioned in the guarantee. Issue No. 6 stands answered in the aforesaid terms. 14. The suit, therefore, stands decreed in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. The plaintiff-bank is expected to take necessary disci-plinary action against the bank officials who failed to secure letters from the company as stated in condition No. 2, by letter dated 29-4-1987 which is at page 190 of the suit, on the strength of which the overdraft facility had been granted, taking assignment of receivables from various companies as security. The bank shall also make necessary entry in the confidential dossier of K. Balakrishna - assistant manager of the plaintiff-bank, as stated in the earlier part of this judgment. A copy of judgment shall be forwarded to the RBI, Mumbai for taking necessary action deemed fit in the matter. Suit decreed partly.
-
1998 (7) TMI 551 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... n. Records were summoned by this Court, on 31-1-1996. As such we are satisfied with the explanations offered by the learned A.C.G.S.C, in this regard. Under the circumstances, the petitioner cannot take advantage that the representation has been decided, belated- ly, at this stage. More so, the Minister concerned had already considered the representation of the petitioner and rejected on 15-2-1996, in a reasonable time and which was communicated to the petitioner as per endorsement in the file. 11. The decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 12. In any view of the matter, the detention order cannot be said to be illegal, and as such, it is not liable to be set aside at this stage. We see no good ground to quash the detention order. That apart one year time of detention order dated 24-11-1995 has already expired. Therefore, the HCP is dismissed. Return the original file to A.C.G.S.C. SCL q DECEMBER 20, 1999
-
1998 (7) TMI 516 - SUPREME COURT
Whether a director of a limited company can be considered as a principal employer liable to pay contributions under section 40?
Held that:- Appeal dismissed. In the absence of any express provision in the Indian Penal Code incorporating the definition of "principal employer" in Explanation 2 to section 405, this definition cannot be held to apply to the term "employer" in Explanation 2. As the High Court has observed, the term "employer" in Explanation 2 must be understood as in ordinary parlance. In ordinary parlance it is the company which is the employer and not its directors either singly or collectively.
-
1998 (7) TMI 514 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Public issue – Fraudulently inducing persons to invest money ... ... ... ... ..... nd take appropriate action. The SEBI is also expected to take action against the bankers to the issue. As held by my brother M.S. Shah, J. in Rich Paints Ltd v. Vadodara Stock Exchange 1998 92 Comp. Cas. 282 (Guj.), the bankers to the issue hold the application moneys in the nature of trust fund . The SEBI will, therefore, find out whether the bankers are responsible in this and take appropriate action. Mr. Jhaveri applies for stay of the order vis-a-vis the conditions on the club. The request is rejected. This is because the opportunity of being heard is being given on the conditions stated above and with stay of execution of the impugned orders in the meanwhile. The conditions are necessary in the facts of the present case. In case the petitioner does not want to accept these conditions, he may inform SEBI accordingly in which case SEBI will be at liberty to execute the order. 12. This petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above order. SCL q SEPTEMBER 20, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 511 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Winding up – Company when deemed unable to pay its debts ... ... ... ... ..... ebruary 13, 1998, were made in the presence of the representative of the respondent-company and they were heard in response to the notice of winding up by the Board. In any case they must and ought to be aware about the proceedings arising therefrom. In the aforestated circumstances, Company Petition No. 145 of 1998, is allowed accepting the recommendations of the Board as contained in the order dated April 30, 1998, which remains unrebutted and unopposed. It is ordered that Chhattar Industries Limited be and is hereby wound up under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. As Company Petition No. 145 of 1998, which is registered on the recommendation of the Board having wider magnitude and scope, is allowed, Company Petition No. 82 of 1998 is disposed of, at this stage, with liberty to the petitioner to revive the same in the event the winding up order, upon recommendations of the Board, is recalled or is withdrawn. Consequently, both the company petitions are disposed of.
-
1998 (7) TMI 509 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Courts - Jurisdiction of - ... ... ... ... ..... ether the complaints are to be dismissed. It is clearly stipulated under section 201 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which reads Procedure by Magistrate not competent to take cognizance of the case - If the complaint is made to a Magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance of the offence, he shall mdash (a)If the complaint is in writing, return it for presentation to the proper Court with an endorsement to that effect (b)If the complaint is not in writing, direct the complainant to the proper Court. In view of this the Magistrate will have to return the complaints to the complainant. In the result therefore, I proceed to pass the following ORDER All these petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. The learned magistrate is directed to return all the complaints to the complain- ant/respondent with necessary endorsements as provided under section 201(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for presentation to the proper Court. SCL q OCTOBER 5, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 505 - SUPREME COURT
Refusal to register the transfer of shares in favour of Bajaj Auto Ltd. which had been purchased by the appellants - Held that:- Appeal allowed. The exercise of discretion by the board of directors in refusing to register the shares in the name of the appellants was not bona fide or in the interest of the company or general body of shareholders. Accordingly, its decision not to register the transfer of shares was not correct.
The impugned order dated 28-7-1986 of the CLB is set aside and the Resolutions dated 29-8-1983,27-9-1983 and 19-11-1983 of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. are set aside and as a consequence thereof, direction is given to respondent No. 2 to register the shares in question within four weeks from the date of this judgment.
-
1998 (7) TMI 503 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dividends - Failure to distribute dividends within time prescribed, Reliefs -Power of Court to grant relief in certain cases,
-
1998 (7) TMI 501 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Winding up – Avoidance of transfer, etc., after commencement of ... ... ... ... ..... . Shri Agrawal has however made a reference to the authority passed by this court in the case of Champaran Sugar Mills Co. Ltd., In re 1998 91 Comp Cas 182 and has contended that in the said case, this court taking into consideration the plight of the workmen had permitted the running of the factory as an interim measure. The facts of the said case were somewhat different from the present one. That apart, the order given in that case could not be complied with by the party which had proposed to run the factory as an interim measure. Thereafter, the workers had also formed a co-operative and had obtained an order for running one of the factories of the said company as an interim measure. However, the said venture has not been very successful and the co-operative has been unable to keep up with its commitments. The said case is, therefore, of no help to learned counsel. In view of the aforesaid reasons, it is not possible to allow the application (A-9) and the same is rejected.
-
1998 (7) TMI 500 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Admission of petition and directions as to advertisement ... ... ... ... ..... ted under rule 24 of the Rules, which view had already been deprecated by the apex court in the decisions cited supra and held contrary to the plain terms of rule 96 of the Rules. In the result, the appeals are allowed and the impugned order passed on C.A. Nos. 408 and 409 of 1998 in C.P. Nos. 17 and 18 of 1997, ordering advertisement and publication of the winding-up petition in the Official Gazette of Tamil Nadu and in the local dailies is set aside. We request the learned single judge, in addition to the grounds of procedure, to consider whether in the exercise of inherent power, for the ends of justice and for prevention of abuse of the process of the court, the petition should or should not be advertised according to law, uninfluenced by the observations made either in this order or in the order impugned. The determination on these aspects also requires consideration of C.A. Nos. 470 to 473 of 1998 according to law. The appeals are ordered accordingly, but without costs.
-
1998 (7) TMI 499 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Annual return - Prosecution for ... ... ... ... ..... tioner, she would come under the definition of an officer in default. If it is not held so any Managing Director, Director, Manager or Secretary would escape the provisions of sections 159 and 220 by simply tendering their resignation as the office bearer of the company. This would defeat the provisions of sections 459 and 220. The trial Court, however, must consider the question whether, after retirement of a Managing Director, Director or Secretary of a company, the records of the company would be available to him or her for filing a return. It was not urged by the petitioner before the trial Court and the first appellate Court that the records of the company were not available with her which prevents her from filing the annual returns and the balance sheets for the years 1987- 88, to 1990-91. This point not having been taken, cannot be gone into at this stage. 14. For the foregoing reasons, I find no merit in the revisions and the same are dismissed. SCL q NOVEMBER 5, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 498 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Application of insolvency rules ... ... ... ... ..... it either the entire amount withdrawn by it or so much out of that amount to satisfy those claims. It is clarified that the undertak- ing and indemnity given by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. shall become invocable only after disposal of the unsold property and the movables and only in case the proceeds received after selling those properties are not enough to satisfy the claims received hereinafter. So far as the discharging the Sales Committee is concerned, in the present situation, in my opinion, the Sales Committee can be discharged, however, in case other claims are received or accepted by the Court, the Sales Committee would be called for the purpose of selling the balance property for fulfilling such liabilities. It is clarified that in case any claims are lodged and the Court is required to adjudicate those claims, the claimants shall give notice of their claim to the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Both the company applications are disposed of. SCL q NOVEMBER 20, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 496 - BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY (CENTRAL GOVERNMENT)
Unpublished price sensitive information - Meaning of, Powers of Board, Offences ... ... ... ... ..... pur- chase of shares in question by HLL from UTI which weakens a crucial aspect of the charge of insider trading that the information involved should not be generally known. An order of prosecution should be based on conclusive determination of all aspects of insider trading and on specific justification in terms of the gravity of the offence. For these reasons, we hold that SEBI was not justified in ordering prosecution of the appellants. It will, however, be open to SEBI to consider invoking the adjudication mechanism prescribed under section 15G read with section 15-1 and 15J after following the prescribed procedure for purposes of determining the desirability and legality of imposing a penalty on the appellants. We have also held in para 21 above that SEBI rsquo s order to award compensation to UTI lacks in jurisdiction. We do not, therefore, consider it necessary to pass a separate order on the appeal filed by UTI. 27. Both appeals are so decided. SCL q NOVEMBER 5, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 493 - SUPREME COURT
Who is to be deemed "occupier" of a factory of a Government company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act?
Held that:- Appeal allowed. As the factories run by the appellant-Corporation are effectively and really owned and controlled by the Central Government they fall within the purview of clause (iii) and not clause (ii) of the first proviso to section 2(n). Thus the High Court was wrong in taking a contrary view. Thus direct respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to accept the persons appointed by the Central Government to manage the affairs of the factories at Namkum as the occupiers of those factories for the purposes of section 2(n) of the Factories Act
-
1998 (7) TMI 491 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Winding up - Court’s power to order costs ... ... ... ... ..... ld liable. 2. After having heard the learned counsel for the notice and after having gone through the record, I find that the sale could not take place pursuant to the advertisement and was a consequence of an order made by this Court in Company Application No. 176 of 1990. If the applicant in that application is to be held responsible for the consequence of ad interim order that was made by this Court on his application, that order would have been made by this Court while disposing of that application. In my opinion, cancellation of the advertisement is a result of an order made by this Court, the applicant at whose instance that order was made cannot be held responsible in independent proceedings. That can be done by the Court while disposing of the said proceedings wherein the ad interim order was made. Therefore, to my mind, there is no justification for recovery of the charges of the advertisement from the notice. The proceedings are disposed of. SCL q NOVEMBER 20, 1998
-
1998 (7) TMI 469 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
Modvat/Cenvat - Deemed credit ... ... ... ... ..... t the utensil scrap, even according to the appellants, are unconditionally exempted under Notification No. 177/88. 3. emsp The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Machine Builders v. CCE - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 576 will cover the issue, wherein, the Larger Bench has held that on materials which are unconditionally exempted, no deemed Modvat credit should be available. It is seen that the ratio of the Larger Bench decision fully applies to the facts of the case and following that ratio, there is no merit in the appeal, which is accordingly rejected.
-
1998 (7) TMI 461 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... urring a particular cost for the packing materials, it is the cost of packing to the buyer, i.e., the cost as charged to the buyer, meaning the packing charges collected from the buyer, which is to be included in the assessable value, even if it is less than the actual cost of packing. On this conclusion, it follows that the confirmation of demand was not sustainable in law. 7. emsp We record the submission made by the learned counsel that though the appellant is entitled to raise the larger contention that the cost of secondary packing in the facts and circumstances of the case would not be includible at all in the assessable value, the contention is not being raised in these appeals and is being raised in another appeal pending before the Tribunal. 8. emsp In view of our finding that the confirmation of demand is not sus shy tainable, the imposition of penalty also cannot stand. 9. emsp For the reasons indicated above, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.
-
1998 (7) TMI 454 - CEGAT, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... f the assessable value of the goods which was a contracted price). The construction of the jetty, demurrage charges paid in the case of transport by sea to the port authorities charges for survey etc. therefore are clearly expenses attributable to transportation they are in any case not expenses connected with the manufacture. The sentence in the reply that but for the expense on the jetty it would not have been possible even to undertake manufacturing activities of many over dimensional equipment has been quoted out of context to support the Commissioner rsquo s conclusion. All that the assessee meant to say, and in fact did, was that it could not have commenced manufacture of the goods unless they could be transported to the customer rsquo s premises. The issue is squarely covered by the ratio of the judgement. Duty was therefore not payable on these expenses. Consequently penalties are not imposable. 5. emsp Appeals allowed. Impugned orders set aside. Consequential relief.
............
|
