Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: companies act 1956 section 581za annual general meetings Court: sebi securities and exchange board of india or securities appellate tribunal sat Page 1 of about 192 results (0.243 seconds)

In Re: Home Trade Limited

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

..... rest of the additional directors had also claimed that they ceased to be directors due to the operation of law as per section 283(g) of the companies act, 1956, though, they have not disputed their directorship in htl during the second phase of manipulations. ..... it was claimed by the shri ranade that he had ceased be a director in htl subsequent to the annual general meeting dated september 29, 2001 by the operation of law since he had not consented for regularizing the appointment in the aforesaid agm. ..... for taking hold, dealing in, converting stocks, shares and securities of all kinds, brokers for units of unit trust of india, brokers for debenture, bonds, government securities, national savings certificates, small savings schemes and generally for securities of all kinds and to carry on the business in india or abroad.1.2 subsequently, the shares of htl was listed on pune stock exchange and bangalore stock exchange and trading started on november 15, 1999.paid up capital ..... shri russell further submitted that he had no contacts apart from what was narrated above, with the company that he never attended any of the board meetings of the company and never received any emoluments from htl for holding the post of non-executive director.3.4 reply of shri dilip jain- vide letter dated may 7, 2004, shri dilip jain submitted that he was approached by .....

Jogeshwar Rijumal Karachiwala and Others Vs. Securities and Exchange B ...

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

..... company allotted on september 29, 2000, 6,30,800 equity shares representing 28.75 per cent of its total paid up capital to the appellants on preferential basis as co-promoters after complying with the provisions of section 81(1a) of the companies act, 1956 ..... the maximum penalty that could be levied as per the provisions of section 15a(a) of the securities and exchange board of india act, 1992 as they then stood was rs.1.5 lacs for each default and this is not a case in which the maximum ..... admitted position of the parties that the shares that were allotted to the appellants had never been listed on any stock exchange and that the trading in the scrip of the company had been suspended since january 7, 2002 which suspension is still continuing. ..... m/s drillco metal carbide limited (for short the company) is a public limited company whose shares are listed on the bombay stock exchange limited mumbai ..... the first condition was that the company sent a copy of its board resolution in respect of the proposed preferential allotment to all the stock exchanges on which the shares of the company were listed and the second condition was that full disclosures had to be made to the shareholders as specified in regulation 3(1)(c) proviso (ii) ..... also admit that they failed to disclose their acquisitions to the company in terms of regulation 7(1) of the takeover code as it ..... appellant did not submit a report to sebi within 21 days of acquiring the shares of the company on preferential basis is not in dispute. .....

Eight Capital Master Fund Ltd. and Others Vs. Securities and Exchange ...

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

..... the board of directors of the target company (hereinafter referred to as bod) passed a resolution to convene an extraordinary general meeting (egm) for seeking the approval of its shareholders for allotting convertible debentures to the appellants on preferential basis in order to raise additional resources amounting to rs.122.40 crores to be utilized for returning the target companys debt and also for additional working capital ..... a notice dated march 3, 2006 was issued under section 81(1a) of the companies act to the shareholders, inter alia, informing them that an egm would be held on march 27, 2006 for seeking their approval for allotment to the appellants on preferential basis 50,32,700 part a convertible debentures of rs. ..... the offer price of rs.14.75 per share having regard to the date on which the bod passed the resolution to convene the egm under section 81(1a) of the companies act for seeking approval of the shareholders for allotment of part a convertible debentures to the appellants on preferential basis. ..... period prior to the date of public announcement, whichever is higher; (c) the average of the weekly high and low of the closing prices of the shares of the target company as quoted on the stock exchange where the shares of the company are most frequently traded during the twenty-six weeks or the average of the daily high and low of the prices of the shares as quoted on the stock exchange ..... and incorporated under the companies act, 1956 with its registered office .....

Wealth Sea Pte Ltd. Manali Properties and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Securi ...

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

..... both dunlop and falcon are companies registered in india under the companies act, 1956. ..... july 16, 2008 sent by the securities and exchange board of india (for short the board) to the merchant banker of the appellants rejecting their request for further valuation of the shares of dunlop india ltd (target company) for determination of the offer price in terms of the securities and exchange board of india (substantial acquisition of shares and takeovers) regulations, 1997 (the takeover code). 2. ..... - a company registered and incorporated under the companies act of british virgin islands, its 100 percent shares and voting rights in dil rim and wheel corporation ltd. ..... the evaluation of a sick company involves factoring in several risk parameters which are determined by the experts through the process of due diligence. ..... this apart, the report does not indicate the methodology and the step by step exercise through which the fair value price per share of dunlop, a sick company, has been arrived at. ..... it appears from the report that the independent valuer appointed by the board has not exercised due diligence required in determining the value of the sick company. ..... chartered accountant which, according to the merchant banker, were apparent anomalies and made a request for the appointment of an independent accounting firm of repute to assess the value of dunlop which at the time of acquisition was a sick company. ..... - a company registered in mauritius (for short dil). .....

Weizmann Limited and Others Vs. Adjudicating Officer of Securities and ...

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

..... it was pointed out that the target company had last declared dividend on the preference shares at its annual general meeting held on 31.1.2001 for the year closing on june 30, 2000 and that the said company did not declare dividend in the next year. ..... in order to answer this question we need to refer to the provisions of the section 87 of the companies act, 1956 (hereinafter called the act) which deals with voting rights. ..... clause (b) of section 87(2), however, entitles the preference shareholder to vote on every resolution placed before the company at any meeting provided three conditions are satisfied(a) the dividend is due on his preference share capital, (b) the whole of it or any part thereof has remained unpaid and (c) in the case of cumulative redeemable preference shares with which we are ..... the right to vote of a preference shareholder will have to be judged from meeting to meeting and he will get a right to vote only in that meeting in which his preference shares satisfy the conditions of section 87(2)(b) of the act. ..... kumar desai learned counsel for the respondent board referred to the explanation to section 87 (2)(b) of the act and emphatically contended that the dividend on preference shares held by the appellants became due on the expiry of two aggregate financial years from the end of the financial year for which the dividend was .....

Sms Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

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

Reported in : (2004)49SCL117SAT

..... section 355-i of the french companies act provides that a company holds control over another(the target) in the following cases - (i)the company holds directly or indirectly, title to a number of shares granting to such holder a majority of voting rights in the general meetings of shareholders of the target (ii) the company holds the majority of voting right in the target pursuant to an agreement with a third party (iii) the company in effect determines, through the votes it holds the decision taken in the general meetings of shareholders ..... voting rights exercised by technip in the annual general meeting of coflexip in may 2000 and may 2001 shri setalvad submitted that these meetings were not extra ordinary general meetings,, but ordinary annual general meetings wherein routine matters are taken up for ..... relied as could be seen from the text of the said regulation "that all other expressions unless defined herein shall have the same meaning as have been assigned to them under the act or the securities contracts (regulation) act, 1956 or the companies act, 1956 or any statutory modification or re enactment thereto as the case may ..... . (a) any relative of that person within the meaning of section 6 of the companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956); and "a listed company whose shares or voting rights or control is directly or indirectly acquired or is being acquired" "the public announcement referred to in regulation 10 or regulation 11 shall be made by the merchant banker not later than four .....

Sebi Vs. Padmini Technologies Limited and

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

..... (c), (d) of securities and exchange board of india (prohibition of fraudulent and unfair trade practices relating to securities market) regulation, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the futp regulations) and the provisions of section 113 of the companies act, 1956.2.1 in the facts and circumstances, a notice dated february 20, 2004 to padmini and its whole time directors, shri vivek nagpal, shri vishnu sarup gupta and shri praveen kumar jain asking them to show ..... under the guise of preferential allotment wherein the beneficiaries turned out to be name - lenders beguiling the true purport of the transactions.3.41 as per the notice for the annual general meeting of padmini held on march 24, 1999, the stated purpose of the preferential issue was ..... nagpal had also stated that the details about preferential allottees were circulated at the extra ordinary general meeting held on march 24, 1999 and that the details regarding allottees could be obtained from padmini ..... preferential allottees were circulated at the extra ordinary general meeting on march 24, 1999. ..... natural justice depends on the circumstances of the case, the nature of the inquiry, the rules under which the concerned authority is acting, the subject matter that is being dealt with, etc.hence, it has a variable content, and is not an inflexible rule having a fixed or rigid connotation.3.6 generally, the question whether an opportunity of cross examination is to be given or not, depends upon the circumstances of each case and .....

Bpl Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

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

..... the direction of the shareholders in general meeting; that person may be the board of directors itself, or it may be, and in some companies it is so, that that person has an authority co-ordinate with the board of directors given to him under the articles of association, and is appointed by the general meeting of the company, and can only be removed by the general meeting of the company. ..... person or body corporate, it is necessary for the party making the charge to establish that the controlling/directing mind of the artificial person, that is, the board of directors or a committee of directors or the shareholders in general meeting, were involved in manipulation, that the subject transactions were never put up before the board of the appellant or a committee of its directors or before its shareholders. ..... :- the board may, in the circumstances specified in regulation 11, and without prejudice to its power under regulation 12, initiate action for suspension or cancellation of registration of an intermediary holding a certificate of registrations under section 12 of the act; provided that no such certificate of registration shall be suspended or cancelled unless the procedure specified in the regulation applicable to such intermediary is complied with" 118 ..... 1975 sc 1549) , while considering the question as to whether the assessee under the central sales tax act, 1956 could be made liable for penalty under the provisions of the state sales tax act, had considered the power to impose penalty .....

Videocon International Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

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

..... stated that jhpl served as the link between the brokers and the appellant company as the appellant cannot purchase its own shares as per section 77 of the companies act and the modus operandi adopted was to show that these are arms ..... would be impracticable to devise regulations in such detail to cover the entire range of situations which could arise in the process of substantial acquisition of shares and take overs and instead there should be a set of general principles which should guide the interpretation and operation of the regulation especially in circumstances which are not explicitly covered by the regulation ..... the same reason stated in the sterlite case extracted above,is nothing but a penalty in effect and is in fact against the interest of investors, as a ban on raising funds to meet the appellant company's business requirements is likely to adversely affect the company's ongoing business activities and further expansion /development and thereby the shareholders' interest .117 ..... air 1975 sc 1549) , while considering the question as to whether the assessee under the central sales tax act, 1956 could be made liable for penalty under the provisions of the state sales tax act, had considered the power to impose penalty ..... in the order that " the price increase in the scrip of the company was not based on any economic fundamentals" and stated that it is only a casual remark without bothering to see the strong financial position of the appellant revealed in its annual accounts.17 .....

Hemant S. Sonawala (Huf) by Its Vs. the Chairman, Securities and

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

..... a relative of the "promoter" within the meaning of section 6 of the companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956); and (ii) any company in which the "promoter" holds 10% or more of the equity capital or which holds 10% or more of the equity capital of the "promoter" or (iii) any corporate body in which a group of individuals or corporate bodies or combination thereof who hold 20% or more of the equity capital in that company also hold 90% or more of the equity capital of the "promoter" and (i) any company in which 10% or more of the share capital is ..... -cause notice (as indeed of the first show-cause notice and the first inquiry) was limited to regulation 10 and could not have traversed beyond that.the appellant was called upon to meet only a case under regulation 10.the replies filed by the appellant and the submissions made were directed to answering a case of breach of regulation 10. ..... pg.482 - relying para 22); peerless general finance & investments co. ..... transfer of shares amongst:- "(i) group companies, coming within the definition of group as defined in the monopolies and restrictive trade practices act, 1969 (25 of 1969); (ii) relatives within the meaning of section 6 of the companies act, 1956 (i of 1956) (iii) (a) indian promoters and foreign collaborators who are shareholders; provided that the transferor(s) as well as the transferee(s) in sub-clauses (a) and (b) have been holding individually or collectively not less than 5% shares in the target company for a period of at least three .....