Advanced Search Results

Mineria Nacional Limitada, a Partnership Firm and Shri Anil Vasudeva S ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CompanyLimitation

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 2(11), 4(2), 10F, 10(3), 10(12), 13, 14 and 260A; Companies(Second Amendment) Act, 2002; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 4 to 24, 29(2), 34 and 34(2); Uttar Pradesh Sales-Tax Act, 1948 - Sections 3B and 10; Sales Tax Act - Sections 10 and 10(3B); Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 260A; Special Court(Trial of Offences Relating to transactions in Securities) Act, 1992; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 43

Reported in : (2007)109BOMLR789

aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board made before the commencement of the Companies(Second Amendment Act, 2002) may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the … 2. The applicant has filed an application dated 16-1-2006 for condonation of delay to file an appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act, for short) against the Order dated 26-9-2005 of the Company Law … 260A. Firstly, Section 260A by providing that appeal shall be filed in 120 days only provides for special period of limitation and the language does

Salem Textiles Limited Vs. Authorized Officer of Phoenix Arc Private L ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

take note of 3 developments that have taken place, one in the year 2002 in the form of Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, the second in the same year 2002 in the form of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, … High Court went to the extent of holding that in the light of Section 35 of the Securitisation Act, 2002, Section 22 of SICA does not survive anymore. (vi) In Nabha Industries Ltd vs. Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation … 30 ==================================================================”115. 1”48. 21 22 ==================================================================”97. 1”39. 17 28 ==================================================================”233. 2”57. 26 124 ==================================================================”370. 1”19. 61 272 ==================================================================”413. ”2. 113 295 ==================================================================”201. - - ”177.

Rojer Mathew Vs. South Indian Bank Ltd and Ors Chief Manager

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

of Chapters 1-B and 1-C of the Companies Act, 6 (2010) 11 SCC112 PART A1956as inserted by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act 2002 which provided for the constitution of a National Company Law Tribunal7 and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal8 … demonstrate an apparent disparity in 96 age of superannuation of Members and Chairpersons/Presiding Officers of different Tribunals. Illustratively, Section 14D of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 provides a Member of Telecom Disputes Settlement and … court from which the adjudicatory power has been transferred… XXX functions are 128. There seems to be no doubt, whatsoever, that the Members of a

Anju Timblo, Managing Director of Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. and ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

Subject : Company

person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board [made before the commencement of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002] may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the … regards impleadment of Sushila Timblo (proposed respondent no.14) was also given up. 12. The first respondent sought amendment of the petition on the following counts: … respondents. 4. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. 5. These appeals under Section 10F of Companies Act, 1956 (the Act, for short) arise out of the order dated 18/05/2015, passed by

Henna George Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

Appellate Authority Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR) had been passed in both the Houses of Parliament; (iii) the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 providing for establishment of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to deal … filling up of the posts of the Members of BIFR remained; (vi) a Bench of BIFR as per Section 12 of SICA is to consist of not less than two Members; that the three members of the BIFR

U.P. Cement Vetanbhogi Sahkari RIn Samiti Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator

Court : Allahabad

Subject : CivilCompany

Reported in : [2010]97SCL196(All)

provides as follows:Appeals from orders.- Appeals from any order made or decision given before the commencement of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, in the matter of the winding up of a company by the Court shall lie to the same … in Section 104(1) and incorporated Section 4 in the CPC. Thus now a specific exclusion was provided. After 2002, Section 100A reads as follows:100A. No furtherappealin certain cases.- Notwithstanding anything contained in any Letters Patent for any High

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others. Vs. Securitie ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Companies

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Section 55A(b), 55A(c), 56, 57, 58, 60B, 60B(1), (2), 2(19A), 60B(9), 235 to 241, 73, 73(1)(2A), 209-A , 68A(1)(a), 2(45AA), 81(1A), 234(1), 234(4)(a), 67(3), 62, 63, 108A, 109, 110, 117A, 117B, 117C, 56, 62, 63, 642, 642(4), 2(19A); Securities and Exchange Board of India (Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 ; Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009 - Regulations 3, 6, 2(zc), 2(p), 2(n), 4(2), 5(1), 6, 7, 16(1), 20(1), 25, 26, 36, 37, 46, 57; Securities and Exchange Board of India(SEBI) Act 1992 - Section 11C, 11A, 15Z, 55A, 68A, 77A, 80A, 108, 109, 110 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 206, 206A, 207, 59 to 81,; Companies (Central Government's) General Rules and Forms, 1956 - Rule 4CC, Form No. 2A,; Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act(SCR), 1956 - Section 2(h), 21, 73(1)(3), 28, 28(1)(b), 20; Companies (Amendment) Act, 2000 - Section 55A, 67(3); Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 - Section 2(19B), 60B(9), 60B(1)(2)(3), ; Constitution of India - Articles 129, ; Companies Act, 2006 - Sections 755, 760,; Food Safety Modernization(FSMA), Act 2000 - Section 85; Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Section 45I(f) ; Companies Amendment Act 53 of 2000 - Section 81(1A); Insurance Act, 1938 - Section 2; Securities Laws (Amendment) Act, 1995 - Sections 13, 16, 28(1)(b), 28(2); Indian Evidence Act - Section 114 ; Companies (Central Government's) General Rules and Forms, 1956 - Rule 4CC, 4D; Unlisted Public Companies (Preferential Allotment) Rules, 2003 - Rule 2,; UPC (PA) Amendment Rules 2011 ; SCR Rules - Rule 19; Unlisted Public Companies (Preferential Allotment) Amendment Rules 2011

Reported in : (2013)1SCC1

a recognized stock exchange. Section 60B, as already indicated, refers to IM. Section 2(19B) was inserted by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1.4.2003, which reads as follows:“2(19B) "information memorandum" means a process undertaken prior to the filing of a … development of securities market; or(ii) to prevent the affairs of any intermediary or other persons referred to in section 12 being conducted in a manner detrimental to the interest of investors or securities market; oriii) to secure the

Madras Bar Association Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

powers relating to winding up vested in the High Courts. The Government accepted the recommendations and passed the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002. The reason for the said amendment was to avoid multiplicity of litigation before various fora and to reduce … JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.1. The Madras Bar Association has filed this Writ Petition seeking a declaration that Sections 12 and 13 of the Tribunal Reforms (Rationalisation and Conditions of Service) Ordinance, 2021 and Sections 184 and

Vs. India Steam Laundry(P) Ltd.Defendant/Re

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Land Acquisition

Secs. 10FA and 647A of the Companies Act, 1956 which were inserted by way of amendment by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002. Mr. Mookherjee also referred to Taxmann’s guide to Companies Bill, 2011 in which in the section captioned as … Apex Court decision in the case of Union of India-Vs.-Venkateshan S., (2002) 5 SCC285 and in particular paragraphs 12 and 13 thereof which read as follows:“12. Further, if the view taken by the High Court and the

Raghunath Rai Bareja and anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : BankingLimitation

Acts : Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 136; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 446, 446(1) and 446(3); Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - Sections 17, 18, 19, 24, 31, 31(1) and 34; Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 34, Rule 11; Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 - Rule 9, 10 and 117; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227

Reported in : 2007(2)ALT114(SC); 2007(1)AWC507(SC); [2007]135CompCas163(SC); (2007)1CompLJ108(SC); 2007(5)CTC642; 2007(3)MhLj83; 2007MPLJ306(SC); 2006(13)SCALE511; (2007)2SCC230; 2006AIRSCW6446

16. In this connection, it may be mentioned that Section 446(3) of the Companies Act was omitted by Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 and evidently the High Court has overlooked this Amendment. As a result in our opinion the High Court … with pendente lite and future interest. A preliminary decree for recovery of Rs. 19,07,800/- with future interest @ 12% per annum was passed by the High Court in favour of the decree-holder Bank, the respondent herein, on