Gujarat Court June 2000 Judgments
Piramal Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Reserve Bank of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: [2001]104CompCas299(Guj)
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The appellant-company challenges the order dated May 10, 2000, made by the learned company judge in Company Petition No. 147 of 2000 appointing the official liquidator as provisional liquidator and issuing an ad interim injunction restraining the appellant (original respondent), its agents, etc., from encumbering, transferring, alienating and disposing of any of the assets of the appellant-company. Notice was issued by the learned judge on the appellant making it returnable on May 18, 2000. 2. It is stated that after the impugned order was made, the official liquidator has started functioning as the provisional liquidator. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the impugned order made by the learned single judge contravenes the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, inasmuch as no such provisional liquidator could have been appointed before issuing a notice on the appellant as contemplated by section 450 of the said Act. It is also argued t...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusinh Juwansinh Parmar Through Power of Attorney-holder, Parmar Ka ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR672
R.R. Tripathi, J.1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner for the relief to the effect that the respondents be directed to sanction the pension of the petitioner as per the pension rules of the Slate Government applicable to the petitioner. The petitioner had also prayed for the interim relief to the effect that the respondents be directed to deposit the pension of the petitioner from the date of his retirement i.e., 7-12-1988 till today before this Court and on such deposit being made, the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the same and also a direction to the effect that the respondents will pay the pension to the petitioner regularly every month. The notice is issued on 15th March, 2000 making the same returnable on 27th March, 2000. At the time of issuing the notice, the Court directed that the concerned respondent shall fix the pension and place the calculation on the record about the amount payable to the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, Mr. Digant Joshi, lear...
Tag this Judgment!Hajaraben Adam Girnari and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj25
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. Civil Application No. 2806 of 2000 has not been placed on the Board. On the request of learned counsel for the petitioners, the papers of this Civil application have been called. In the civil application, prayer has been made by petitioners for grant of permission to amend the special civil application as proposed therein. This proposed amendment in the pleadings has been considered. As the averments proposed to be incorporated in the special civil application by amendment thereof have been considered now this civil application stands disposed of accordingly.2. Rule. The learned counsel for the respondents waive service of Rule on behalf of respondents.3. The petitioners were elected as councillors of Mangrol Municipality as independent candidates from the constituency reserved for women candidates. On 29-8-1997, a notice was given to the petitioners by respondent No. 3 under Section 38 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, to show cause as to why action should not...
Tag this Judgment!Hajraben Adam Girnari and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-12-2000
Reported in: (2001)4GLR3563
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Civil Application No. 2806 of 2000 has not been placed on the Board. On the request of learned Counsel for the petitioners, the papers of this Civil Application have been called. In the Civil Application, prayer has been made by petitioners for grant of permission to amend the Special Civil Application as proposed therein. This proposed amendment in the pleadings has been considered. As the averments proposed to be incorporated in the Special Civil Application by amendment thereof have been considered now this Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.2. Rule. The learned Counsel for the respondents waive service of Rule onbehalf of respondents.The petitioners were elected as Councillors of Mangrol Municipality as independent candidates from the Constituency reserved for women candidates. On 29-8-1997, a notice was given to the petitioners by respondent No. 3 under Section 38 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, to show cause as to why action should not be taken...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›