Advanced Search Results

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 … up share capital of just Rs.10 lakhs and virtually no assets and the companies had collected about Rs. 27,000 crores from about 3 crore subscribers, through unsecured OFCDs. Learned senior counsel pointed out that Sections 55A, proviso

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 … The amendment/ impleadment (of proper parties) is necessary to do complete justice. 27. POINT NO.1:- It hardly needs to be stressed that an appeal under … 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

D.C.M. Financial Services Ltd. Co. Vs. M.P. Dhingra

Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Subject : MRTP

Magistrate being conferred on it, after the amendment of the Act as a result of Consumer Protection Act (Amendment) Act, 2002. 6. With reference to the first contention of the petitioner it is apparent from the impugned order itself … the petitioner had also filed a petition under Section 391 of the Companies Act being Company Petition No. 48/2001 before the Honble Company Court, which … directed against order dated 25.7.2003 passed by District Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, Institutional Area, New Delhi in proceedings under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act). 2. Since common questions of fact … served upon the petitioner, prior to the passing of the impugned order. Secondly, whether the District Forum was competent to pass the impugned order, without

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 … dated 26-5-2009 deciding the Application for Correction in an earlier order dated 27-4-2007 passed by learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Company Appeal/Objection No. 85/2007

S. Pattabhiraman Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court : Chennai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 5, 43A, 159, 160, 161, 162, 166, 167, 167(1), 168, 169, 220, 220(1), 220(2), 220(3), 222, 397, 398, 610, 621A(1), 633, 633(1) and 633(2); Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002

Reported in : [2009]148CompCas705(Mad); [2009]96SCL305(Mad)

a mandatory duty cast on every company. Under Section 167 of the Companies Act, as amended by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 See [2003] 113 Comp Cas 201, the Central Government on the application of any of the members of … Mr. S. Venkataramanan, the following is the shareholding pattern of the shareholders:(1) S. Venkataramanan - 13,750 shares - 27.5 per cent, of shareholding as shareholder and director.(2) S. Pattabiraman (the petitioner) - 13,750 shares - 27.5 per

Arunachalam Muthu Vs. Nafan Bv and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

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 … 1. The Appellant has filed the above Appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (“the Act”) impugning the order dated 31st May 2012 passed by the … By the said order, the Chairman, CLB has rejected Company Application No. 275 of 2012 moved by the Appellant under Regulation 4 and Regulation 44

M/S United Breweries (Holdings) Limited vs Offilical Liquidator

Court : Karnataka

filed, the provision relevant for that purpose was Section 391(7) of the Act. Although in terms of the Companies (Second Amendment Act) 2002 (‘2002 Amendment’), Section 391(7) stood omitted, the said amendment was to take effect only from date notified by … in Raghunath Rai Bareja and another Vs. Punjab National Bank and others7 and submits that at Paragraph No. 27 the Court observed that:(2007) 2 SCC 230 - 20 -In this connection, it may be mentioned that Section

Sharath Rukmangada and Another Vs. Cauvery Papers Limited (In Liqn), R ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Company

or before or after commencement of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1960] (65 of 1960) (3) ***Omitted by the Companies (Second Amendment Act) Act, 2002 (4) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub- section (3) shall apply to any proceeding pending in … the Debts Recovery Tribunal in O.A.872/1999, which is produced at Annexure-C, and also to set-aside the orders dated 27.05.2015 and 24.06.2015 passed by respondent No.2 in DCP No.3096 of O.A.No.872/1999 produced at Annexure-F, as they are non-est,

New Bridge Holdings B.V. Vs. Ttk-lig Limited and ors.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Companies Act - Section 406; Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 10; Land Revenue Act - Section 40; Constitution of India - Article 227; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 195(1)(b); Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39 Rule 2(3)

gain. [Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply on and after the commencement of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002.]” 11. Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 confers a power on the High Court to … filed C.A.No.113 of 2011 before the Company Law Board seeking initiation of proceedings for disobedience. By order dated 27.5.2011, the Company Law Board adjourned the matter to 1.6.2011 for hearing on the implementation of the order dated

M/S.Pioneer Alloy Castings Ltd., (In Liq Vs. 1.The Assistantgeneral Ma ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Land Acquisition

in appeal before the Supreme Court or a High Court. Section 537 (Prior to its substitution by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 - 537 - Avoidance of certain attachments, executions, etc., in winding up by or subject to supervision of … however, ordered on 31.12.2013.13. The said applicant states that he had entered into a memorandum of understating dated 27.07.2009 with the company in liquidation and has let out his immovable property worth Rs.12 crores for a period