Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: coal india regulation of transfers and validation act 2000 section 4 validation of certain transfers Court: company law board clb Page 2 of about 24 results (0.255 seconds)

Dr. Mrs. Mrunalini Devi Puar and Vs. Gaekwad Investment Corporation

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (1995)82CompCas899

..... also pleaded that even if the bench comes to a conclusion to stay the proceedings in the exercise of the inherent powers of the board as per provisions of regulation 44, his request pending from february 20, 1992, for interim reliefs should be considered. he pointed out that in the case of senaji kapurchand v. pannaji devichand ..... or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. thus, the provisions of section 151 are in pari materia with the provisions of regulation 44 of the company law board regulations. while the provisions of sections 10 and 151 of the civil procedure code may not be directly relevant for the proceeding before the company law board which ..... s stay application filed on may 11, 1992. the delhi high court declined to interfere and the respondents are considering filing of an appeal to the supreme court of india and, therefore, sought an adjournment of this hearing for three weeks. in addition to that, he also gave the ground of non-availability of the senior counsel, .....

Nekkala Usha Rani, Dr. Manjula Vs. Visakha Imagings and Medical

Court : Company Law Board CLB

..... petitioners is unfair and burdensome. even when the clb exercises the powers within the framework of the principles of natural justice and the company law board regulations 1991 as contemplated in rajinder kumar malhotra and ors. v. harbanslal malhotra and sons limited and ors. (supra), it cannot go to the rescue of ..... v. microparticle engineers private limited and ors. and s. munusamy v. micromeritics engineers private limited; (2) parmeshwari prasad gupta (deed., through legal representatives) v. union of india; (3) ansar khan and ors. v.finecore cables private limited and ors.; and (4) rashmi seth v.tillsoil farms private limited and ors. (supra). the respondents ..... any merits and must appropriately be remedied in the interest of the company, on the principles enunciated in pearson education inc. v. prentice-hail of india private limited and ors. (supra).the relationship between the petitioners group and the respondents group as borne out by the subsequent developments and the consequent .....

V. Ramesh Kumar and ors. Vs. Shanthini Jayakrishnan and ors.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2008)141CompCas915

..... of the powers under sections 397 and 398 read with section 402; (ii) to make appropriate orders bringing to an end the matters complained of and (iii) to regulate the conduct of the future affairs of the company, the following order is passed: (i) all the transfers effected after june, 2003 in respect of shares of the ..... meeting of the board of directors is mandatory, without which any resolution passed at such meeting is in operative as held in parameshwari prasad gupta v. union of india (supra). this shall equally apply to the resolutions passed by the board of directors of the company, appointing directors and sanctioning transfer of shares, impugned in ..... directors is bad and invalid and that the decision taken at such board meeting is invalid; (c) parmeshwari prasad gupta (deed., through legal representatives) v. union of india (1974) vol.44 cc 41 that any board meeting convened without notice to one director is not valid and that resolutions passed at such meeting is inoperative; and .....

A. Arumugam, M. Rajagopal and T. Vs. Pioneer Bakeries Private Limited

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2008)141CompCas391

..... of the powers under sections 397 and 398 read with section 402; (ii) to make appropriate orders bringing to an end the matters complained of and (iii) to regulate the conduct of the future affairs of the companies, the following order is passed: (i) all the transfers effected after june, 2003 in respect of shares of the ..... a meeting of the board of directors is mandatory, without which any resolution passed at such meeting is inoperative as held in parmeshwari prasad gupta v. union of india (supra). this shall equally apply to the resolutions passed by the board of directors of the companies, appointing directors and sanctioning transfer of shares, impugned in the ..... unreasonably short notice to the directors is bad and invalid and that the decision taken at the board meeting is invalid; (c) parmeshwari prasad gupta v. union of india (1974) vo.44 cc 417 that any board meeting convened without notice to one director is not valid and that resolutions passed at such meeting is inoperative; and .....

Mrs. Saroj Hashmukh Patel and ors. Vs. Kantilal Pranalal Patel and ors ...

Court : Company Law Board CLB

..... the purpose of removing the fifth petitioner from the office of director of the company. in the light of the decision of the supreme court in life insurance corporation of india v. escorts ltd. air 1986 sc 1310 "every shareholder of a company has the right, subject to statutorily prescribed procedural and numerical requirements, to call an extra ordinary general meeting ..... shares. any allotment without making any offer to all the shareholders and that too on par, while the share value was high, must be set aside.needle industries (india) limited v. needle industries neway (india) holdings limited (1981) air sc 1298 - to show that the court is empowered to grant relief under sections 397 and 398, to do substantial justice between the .....

Bhadresh Kantilal Shah Vs. Magotteaux International and

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2002)111CompCas220

..... the icc, the supreme court observed : "we are afraid this kind of relief may not be permissible at all in domestic courts in respect of an international arbitration regulated by the provisions of the foreign awards (recognition and enforcement) act, 1961. the high court, we regret to say, was in serious error in entertaining this ..... 'foreign award' means an arbitral award on differences between persons arising out of legal relationships, whether contractual or not, considered as commercial under the law in force in india, made on or after october 11, 1960 : (a) in pursuance of an agreement in writing for arbitration to which the convention set forth in the first schedule ..... foreign arbitration provided by parliament is an indefeasible right in which the court does not have any kind of discretion. he also pointed out, referring to the singaran coal syndicate ltd. v. balmakund marwari, air 1931 cal 772, wherein the court held that if matters which are agreed to be referred are mixed up in .....

Shri Tapas Sinha Roy and ors. Vs. Linkmen Services Pvt. Ltd. and

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2008)141CompCas568

..... to the supplementary affidavit wherein the petitioners have refuted the allegations by clearly stating that under the provisions of the telecom regulatory authority of india act, 1997 and the regulations framed thereunder to contend that the question of recovery as sought to be projected by the respondents is totally ill-founded since under the ..... jurisdiction, which clothes the court with discretionary powers "...the discretion cannot be exercised arbitrarily or according to one's own will or whim. it has to be regulated by law, allay its rigour advance the remedy and to relieve against abuse. the court, therefore, exercising equity jurisdiction, cannot ignore the well known maxims of ..... and were not shareholders on that date.further, it was argued that without prejudice to the foregoing submissions in term of clause (4) of clb regulations this board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the question of service of notice in as much as it requires receiving of evidence and as such, .....

In Re: Legend Technologies

Court : Company Law Board CLB

..... view of my foregoing conclusions and in exercise of the powers under sections 397 and 398 read with section 402 of the act and with a view to regulate the conduct of the company's affairs, the following orders is/passed. (i) the transfer of 28500 shares by the petitioner in favour of the second ..... the requisition on the matter to be discussed at the meeting and, therefore, it is abundantly clear as approved by the apex court in life insurance corporation of india v. escorts ltd. (supra) that every shareholder of a company has the right, subject to statutorily prescribed procedural and numerical requirements to requisition an extra ordinary ..... neither any irregularity in removal of the petitioner nor does it constitute an act of oppression. o mjr neither denied the application made to the reserve bank of india seeking approval for allotment of shares in his favour nor the transfer deed signed by him. furthermore, the foreign inward remittance certificate would establish the purpose for .....

Namita Gupta Vs. Cachar Native Joint Stock Co. Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2002)110CompCas86

1. This petition is in sequence to an earlier petition CP No. 8 of 1998 filed by the petitioners alleging acts of oppression and mismanagement in the affairs Cachar Native Joint Stock Co. Ltd. (the company) filed under Section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act'). The main issue involved in that petition was to decide as to which group of shareholders - whether the petitioners or the respondents - controlled the majority voting power in the company. Considering the nature of the shareholding, this Bench by an order dated 1-6-1999 directed that the company should convene an EOGM to elect directors. This order was challenged by both the parties before the Gauhati High Court which upheld the order of this Bench. This Bench also appointed Shri Justice J.M. Srivastava (Retired) to preside over the meeting that was convened on 29-11-1999. In the EOGM, the respondents had proposed the election of the then 7 directors while the petitioners had proposed election of 6 directors in pla...

Khounish Chowdhury Vs. Kero Rajendra Monolithics Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

..... further, by giving such a short notice, that too for a meeting on a sunday, to the nri directors is a clear act of oppression. as per the regulations of the company as approved by the board, nri directors are to be given 6 weeks notice for the board meeting. neither of the notices dated 30-6-1997 ..... petition could be heard, notwithstanding the fact that the conditions of section 399 are not fulfilled, first to determine their entitlement (sic). in dipak g.mehta v. shree anupar chemicals (india) (p.) ltd [1999] 21 scl 107 (clb - n. delhi), this board took this view and considered the maintainability of the petition first in terms of section 399. ..... 1-9-1997 that too completely omitting allotment to nris who had also remitted over rs. 20 lakhs as share application money. even assuming that the permission from the rbi (which according to the petitioners has been received) had not been fully received for allotment of nris, the company/directors should not have reduced the shareholdings of the .....