Skip to content


Companies Act 1956 Section 220 - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: companies act 1956 section 220 Page 1 of about 1,047 results (1.978 seconds)
Jan 11 1994 (HC)

Ravindra Narayan and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: [1994]81CompCas925(Raj); 1994(1)WLN532

..... shall proceed against the remaining accused namely the company and shri p c maheshwari the managing director of the company companies act 1956 section 220 1 amp 2 expression officer in default meaning ..... judicial magistrate economic offences rajasthan jaipur for the offence under section 220 of the companies act 1956 for short the companies act at the relevant time all the four petitioners are said .....

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Dec 18 1995 (HC)

Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation Vs. Electrothermic (P.) Ltd ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: [1996]86CompCas402(AP)

companies act 15 section 529a and section 530 of the companies act 1956 speak of overriding preferential payments and preferential payments the employer of any persons under the employees state insurance act 1948 34 of 1948 or any other law for the 15 section 529a and section 530 of the companies act 1956 speak of overriding preferential payments and preferential payments in a stated that a statutory right to sell the property under section 29 of the act has to be exercised with the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 01 2002 (HC)

Salim Akbarali Nanji and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors. and De ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2003(2)ALLMR278; 2003(2)BomCR557; [2003]113CompCas141(Bom); [2003]48SCL1(Bom)

if all the requirements contemplated under part ix of the companies act are complied with section 575 of the companies act companies act and submitted that the provisions of the said act are contrary inconsistent and incongruous with each other and in of the companies central government s general rules and forms 1956 along with the resolution passed at the special general meeting an elaborate examination of the matter enjoined upon it under section 22 of the banking regulation act decided to grant its

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 12 1977 (HC)

Registrar of Companies, Gujarat Vs. Kavita Benefit Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: [1978]48CompCas231(Guj)

fund company under clause e of section 433 of the companies act 1956 on the ground that the company is unable cots company winding up sections 433 and 434 of companies act 1956 registrar of company filed petition for winding up chit company winding up sections 433 and 434 of companies act 1956 registrar of company filed petition for winding up chit fund the company shall bear its own cots company winding up sections 433 and 434 of companies act 1956 registrar of company

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 31 2016 (HC)

The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Another Vs. M/s. Reliance ...

Court: Mumbai

act 1958 1 whether a scheme sanctioned between the two companies under section 391 and 394 of the companies act is as defined under section 2 l of the bombay stamp act which includes every document by which any right or liability the high court under section 394 of the companies act 1956 in respect of amalgamation or reconstruction of companies and every act 17 of 1993 with effect from 1 4 1003 section 2 i executed and execution used with reference to instruments

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 24 1973 (HC)

In Re: Kril Standard Products Private Ltd.

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: [1976]46CompCas203(Guj); (1974)0GLR810

attempt is made to acquire controlling block of shares in companies it is not difficult for the industrialists to push through under section 235 or any other section of the companies act it would thus appear that the statutory provisions have been by schedules ia to section 6 of the companies act 1956 their unity of interest due to their close family relationship understood in popular vocabulary cannot attract the application of the section therefore the contention will have to be rejected on two

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 30 2016 (HC)

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) Vs. Competition Commission of I ...

Court: Delhi

commercial realities micromax contended that profit margin of indian mobile companies was in the range of six to eight percent and third parties who do not have his consent from the act of making using offering for sale selling or importing for act 1956 would override certain provisions of the companies act 1956 under section 446 2 of the companies act 1956 the competition act is reproduced below 5 nothing contained in this section shall restrict i the right of any person to restrain

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 04 1995 (HC)

The Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Limited Vs. Majestic A ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1995Delhi373; [1999]96CompCas937(Delhi)

winding up order should not be passed under the indian companies act the aforesaid argument of the learned counsel for the of companies act 1956 sections 232 1 of indian companies act 1913 section 69 of transfer of property act 1882 and shall be void section 537 1 of the companies act 1956 is reproduced as under 537 i where any company is this right however is subject to other provisions such as sections 529 529a of the companies act 1956 7 the next

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 17 2008 (HC)

In Re: Bpl Display Device Ltd. (Erstwhile Uptron Colour Picture Tube L ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2009]150CompCas280(All)

declaring interim dividend in accordance with the provisions of the companies act 1956 45 shri shyam narain sliri p k sinha is necessary for initiating or continuing the proceedings under rdb act 1993 this judgment was later on considered in rajasthan state is in addition to not in delegation of companies act 1956 section 37 of the sarfaesi act 40 in a given that the company should be wound up in terms of section 20 1 of the sick industrial companies special provisions act

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 06 1973 (HC)

Rikhabchand Mohanlal Surana Vs. the Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Comp ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR748

his decree ii that even under section 456 of the companies act 1956 the official liquidator cannot take into his custody india are to be found in the presidency towns insolvency act 1909 and the provincial insolvency act of 1920 and only 46 46 a 46b section 73 companies act i of 1956 sections 390 392 433 441 456 529 provincial insolvency act i r 1931 sind 164 which is a ease under section 51 of the provincial insolvency act 1920 and deals with

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //