Himachal Pradesh Court April 1993 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Orissa Sponge Iron Ltd. Vs. Rishabh Ispaat Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1993
Reported in: (1998)2CompLJ99(HP)
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. 1. Heard. This is an application moved by respondent-company praying for stay of further proceedings in Company Petition No. 4 of 1992, which the petitioner has preferred under Section 439 read with Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956, praying for winding up of Company and for appointing liquidator to take charge of assets and records of the Company. 2. It is averred in the application that respondent-applicant Company is a Sick Industrial Company within the meaning of provisions of Sick Industrial Company (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Company has made a reference to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') for determining the measures, which shall be adopted with respect to the Company and as per the communication received by the applicant, the said reference stands registered as case No. 24 of 1993. 3. This application came up for orders on 31st March...
Ashok Nath Singh Panwar Vs. Upasna Panwar and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-20-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ998
ORDERKamlesh Sharma, J.1. Both these petitions arise out of the same judgment dated 11-6-1992 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, whereby the judgment dated 12-8-1991 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur District at Nahan was modified to the extent that the maintenance allowance of Rs. 150/- granted in favour of first respondent wife was increased to Rs. 300/- per month and the maintenance allowance of Rs. 400/-granted in favour of second respondent daughter Miss Chamcham was increased to Rs. 500/- per month, therefore, these are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Petitioner Ashok Nath Singh Panwar was married to first respondent Smt. Upasna Panwar in the year 1979 and second respondent Miss Chamcham was born out of their wedlock. After some time the relations between the husband and wife became strained and the wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on her behalf and on behalf of her minor daughter. The ...
Satya Dev Sood and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1993
Reported in: AIR1994HP17
Devinder Gupta, J. 1. Petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of Memorandum (Annexure PB) dated 18th April, 1984 issued by the Commissioner Transport, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla.2. Petitioners, the petty transporters are owning and possessing public carrier trucks having national permits. For purchase of their vehicles they had obtained loan from various financial institutions namely Nation-, alised or non-Nationalised Banks, Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation etc. It is their case that respondent No. 2 on 18th April, 1984 issued a Memorandum, purpoting to insist upon the production of no objection certificate from financial institutions at the time of issuance/renewal of certificate of fitness. This requirement, according to petitioners is not in consonance with the provisions of law and the same is under challenge being ultra vires and unconstitutional.3. Writ petition is contested by respondents. Reply has been filed on the affidavit of Secretary State Transport Auth...
State Vs. Vidya Devi and Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-19-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3556
Bhawani Singh, Actg. C.J.1. Certain provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereafter shortly the Act') came for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sudarshan Kumar, 1989 Cri LJ 1412. In these cases the accused had either been discharged since the prosecution had failed to produce the notifications under Sections 41 or 42 and/or the trial Court had found that the provisions of Sections 50 and 55 of the Act had not been complied with although they were mandatory in nature. In some cases, the accused had been convicted and sentenced to the minimum rigorous imprisonment prescribed under the Act and the decisions had been assailed on merits. In these cases also it had been submitted that the mandatory provisions of the Act had not been complied with and the convictions were liable to be set aside.2. The matter was examined quite exhaustively and it was held that the provisions of Sections 41(2), 42(2) and 50(...
H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Comm ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-06-1993
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ469HP
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. 1. Order Annexure PE-3 passed by the respondent on September 7/13, 1979, levying damages under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (Act No. 19 of 1952) (herinafter referred to as 'the Act') is under challenge by the petitioner in this Civil Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 read with 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The petitioner-company is a Government undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with effect from September 24, 1970. Share capital of the company was received on March 29, 1971 and it actually commenced its business in June-July, 1971. The company initially carried on the business of procurement and distribution of tractors and its spare parts. The other activities of procurement and distribution of Iron and Steel, Tree spray oil etc. were added later on. During the year 1970-71, it had only one employee, who was on deputation from the Government. In 1971-72, there were 16 employ...
Shivalik Chit Fund and Machine Tools (P) Ltd. Vs. Agricultural Industr ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-05-1993
Reported in: AIR1996HP83,[1997]89CompCas62(HP)
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. 1. Ravinder Kumar, who was appointed as liquidator by the creditors of the petitioner-company, under the creditors voluntary winding up provisions, by virtue of an order passed on 27th March, 1981 in Company Application No. I of 1981, was authorised to institute or defend any suit, prosecution or any other legal proceedings, civil or criminal on behalf of the petitioner-company.2. By moving this application under Ss. 512 and 518 read with Ss. 467 and 468 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act No. 1 of 1956), (hereinafter to be called as 'the Act'), read with Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, the voluntary liquidator has prayed that petitioner's claim for Rs. 1,68,405/- be allowed with costs and decree be passed infavour of the petitioner against the respondents with interest etc. It is alleged that respondent No. 1 took a loan of Rs. 3,76,000 from the petitioner-company on different dates by executing promissory notes and other loan documents. The loan was p...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›