Advanced Search Results

Mega Resources Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Subject : Land Acquisition

of regulation 7(1), that it has to be noted while the 1997 Regulation was notified in 1997, the Depositories Act, 1996 which provide for de-mat trading of shares was already in position. He refuted the Appellant's contention that regulation … wake of the company's statement that the letter did not reach it 28. Based on the findings in the investigation, the Respondent decided to pursue … Madras AIR 1953 SC 274 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed that " it is a settled rule of construction that to ascertain the legislative intent all the constituent parts of a statute are to be

Messer Holdings Limited,and ors.Vs. Shyam Madanmohan Ruia,and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : civil

Acts : code of civil procedure 1908 - Order 40 Rule 1 ;Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 - Section 28, 155; Securities Contracts Act - sub-sections (2), (5), (7), (9), (10) and (12) of Section 111 , 111 A, 22A; Depositories Act, 1996 - Section 111 A

the plain mandate of Section 111A. Besides, Section 111A was introduced in the Companies' Act, 1956 by the Depositories Act, 1996 with effect from 20th September 1995. The plain intendment and meaning of Section 111A must prevail." The Learned … the 2nd Defendant company installed at Mukund Ltd. at Kalwa, Thane Dist. with all powers under Order 40 Rule 1 of CPC 1908. 9 appeal 855.03 gr..sxw(c) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the Suit, … 27th June 1961 by which, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 28(2) of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Central Government specified contracts

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

Court : Mumbai Goa

Subject : Company

cannot be said to be transfer of business as such. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that under the Depositories Act, 1996 (under the new regime), the shares are held in a dematerialised (demat form). It is submitted that, it … in a Company Petition. The point is accordingly answered in the affirmative. 28. POINT NOS. 2 AND 3 :- The main thrust of the challenge … that the first respondent filed two applications being CA.No.5/2013, which is an application for amendment, under order VI, rule 17 of C.P.C., read with Regulations 44 and 46 of the Company Law Board Regulations (Regulations, for short)

G.R. Didwania Vs. A.C. Choksey

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 16, 28 and 34

Reported in : 2002(4)ALLMR187; 2002(4)BomCR793; (2002)2BOMLR716; [2004]120CompCas744(Bom); 2002(2)MhLj604

of the petitioner is concerned, it is pointed out that considering Section 28 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as also bye-law 226(2), the contracts made on the exchange in all cases are deemed to be made … 226(2), the contracts made on the exchange in all cases are deemed to be made subject to the rules, bye-laws, regulations and usages of the stock exchange. The Tribunal, it is contended has given a finding that

Finolex Industries Ltd. Vs. Mr. Anil Ramchand Chhabria

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 43-A, 108, 111(2), (4) & (5), 111-A and 114; Depositories Act, 1996 - Sections 28; Indian Limitation Act, 1972; Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985; Depositories (Related) Laws Amendment Act, 1997

Reported in : 2000(3)BomCR644; (2000)2BOMLR336; [2008]144CompCas738(Bom); 2000(4)MhLj81

proviso has not been given in co-relation to the other provisions of the Companies Act read with the Depositories Act, 1996. By giving this interpretation, the CLB has merely justified its earlier finding that the proviso to section 111A(2) … for the shares held in Public Companies. This is evident from section 28 of the Depositories Act. This section is as follows.'28. The provisions of … CLB had come to the conclusion that the provisions is vague, it ought not to have applied the rule of literal interpretation. The function of the Court whilst interpreting the statue is to avoid an interpretation which

Pushpanjali Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Renudevi Choudhary and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

respondent Nos.1 and 2. Secondly, the pledge was admittedly not created in accordance with the provisions of the Depositories Act, 1996 and in particular, section 12 thereof. We have held that the provisions of section 12 are mandatory and … their DP accounts of an aggregate value of Rs.88,50,000/-. (B)(i). The appellant's case is that on 15th and 28th October, 2013, meetings took place between respondent Nos.1 and 2 and itself whereat the appellant objected to the

Jry Investments Private Limited Vs. Deccan Leafine Services Ltd. and o ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 108; Depositories Act, 1996 - Sections 10 and 12; Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 148 and 172; Securities and Exchange Board of India (Depositories and Participants) Regulations, 1996 - Regulation 58; Securities and Exchange Board of India (Depositories and Participants) Act, 1996 - Sections 58(2)

Reported in : [2004]121CompCas12(Bom); [2004]56SCL339(Bom)

nature of the shares in the demat form, particularly since the procedure prescribed for pledging shares by the Depositories Act, 1996, has not been followed. The submission deserves acceptance.15. It must be remembered that the shares in question are … parties. The plaintiffs' case is that under the loan agreement dated May 28, 2001, the intention of transferring the shares to the defendants was for … from defendant No. 1 could not get any title in the shares. There are certain exception to the rules that no person can pass a better title to another than he himself possesses. The law acknowledges cases

Ptc India Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Mr. Venkateshwarlu Kari

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.The primary legal issue which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the Depositories Act, 1996 read with the Regulation 58 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Depositories and Participants) Regulations, 19961 … being at sea the master could not be notified; the true explanation was perhaps that it was a rule of the law merchant, developed in order to facilitate mercantile transactions, whereas the process of pledging goods on … Venkateswarlu Kari, respondent No.1, was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional.122.4 On 28th December 2017, PIFSL issued a notice under the Pledge Deed apprising MHPL

Jayanand Jayant Salgaonkar and Others Vs. Jayashree Jayant Salgaonkar ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of the Companies Act, 1956, (Equivalent to Section 72 of the Companies Act, 2013.)and Bye-Law 9.11 under the Depositories Act, 1996, (Incorrectly described in Kokateas Section 9 to the Act.)and found that once a nomination is made, the securities … persons, unless the nomination is varied or cancelled in the prescribed manner. 28. Mr. Pais submission that the expression ‘right to receive is materially different … whom his securities shall vest in the event of his death in the manner prescribed under the Business Rules from time to time. 9.11.2. The securities held in such account shall automatically be transferred in the name

Jer Rutton Kavasmanek and anr. Vs. Gharda Chemicals Ltd. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company Law

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Section 43A; General Clauses Act - Section 6; Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 - Section 28; Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985; Depositories Act, 1996

be noted that sub-section 14 was added to section 111 by way of consequential amendment introduced by the Depositories Act, 1996. The effect of amendment is that in case of public companies to which Depositories Act would apply, instead … respondent's factory at Dombivali was concerned, it had constructed in excess of the construction permissible under the MIDC Rules. The second respondent informed the second appellant that he wanted to involve the second appellant in the aforesaid … have been framed by this Court in its order of Admission, dated 28th June 2010. The same read as under:- "Heard all the parties. In