Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: companies second amendment act 2002 section 133 amendment of other enactment Page 2 of about 11,147 results (0.487 seconds)

Raghunath Rai Bareja and anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2007(2)ALT114(SC); 2007(1)AWC507(SC); [2007]135CompCas163(SC); (2007)1CompLJ108(SC); 2007(5)CTC642; 2007(3)MhLj83; 2007MPLJ306(SC); 2006(13)SCALE511; (2007)2SCC230; 2006AIRSCW6446

..... amendment. as a result in our opinion the high court has no power to transfer the execution petition to the debts recovery tribunal. at any ..... than that in which the winding up of the company is proceeding may, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, be transferred to and disposed of by that court. 16. in this connection, it may be mentioned that section 446(3) of the companies act was omitted by companies (second amendment) act, 2002 and evidently the high court has overlooked this .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. R. Gandhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2007]137CompCas679(SC); (2007)3CompLJ1(SC); JT2007(8)SC653; (2007)6MLJ1805(SC); 2007(7)SCALE589; (2007)4SCC341; [2007]76SCL350(SC)

..... judicial functions, traditionally performed by courts in any tribunal or authority, outside the judiciary. the question to be determined is whether such 'wholesale transfer of powers' as contemplated by the companies (second amendment) act, 2002 would offend the constitutional scheme of separation of powers and independence of judiciary, so as to aggrandize one branch over the other.5. since the issues raised in the ..... these appeals is to the validity of the provisions of companies act, 1956 as amended by the companies (second amendment) act, 2002, which provides for setting up of national company law tribunal and national company law appellate tribunal. barring the jurisdiction exercised under articles 226 and 227, almost all jurisdictions hitherto exercised by the high courts in regard to the company matters would be transferred and exercised by the proposed .....

Sumitomo Corporation Vs. Cdc Financial Services (Mauritius) Ltd. and o ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC1594; 2008(1)ARBLR452(SC); (2008)1CompLJ393(SC); JT2008(3)SC32; 2008(4)MhLj31; 2008(3)SCALE92; (2008)4SCC91; [2008]82SCL495(SC); 2008AIRSCW1766

..... scope of the jurisdiction conferred, in respect of companies having their registered offices in the district.10f. appeals against the order of the company law board.- any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the company law board made before the commencement of the companies (second amendment) act, 2002 may file an appeal to the high ..... court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the company law board to him on any question of law arising ..... : air1994sc158 , the main question for decision relates to the meaning of the expression 'the high court' in section 10f of the companies act, 1956 which has been inserted in the principal act by the companies (amendment) act, 1988 w.e.f. may 31, 1991. the controversy is whether the high court to which the appeal lies under section 10f .....

S. Pattabhiraman Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court : Chennai

Reported in : [2009]148CompCas705(Mad); [2009]96SCL305(Mad)

..... of any of the members of a company can either call for or direct for a general meeting ..... which penalty is imposed under section 168 of the act, certainly stands on a different footing on the factual circumstances of the case. under section 166 of the act, convening of annual general meeting is a mandatory duty cast on every company. under section 167 of the companies act, as amended by the companies (second amendment) act, 2002 see [2003] 113 comp cas 201, the central government on the application .....

Shri V.S. Krishnan and ors. Vs. Westfort Hi-tech Hospital Ltd. and ors ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2008]142CompCas235(SC); (2008)2CompLJ1(SC); (2008)2MLJ1192(SC); 2008(3)SCALE184; (2008)3SCC363; [2008]83SCL44(SC)

..... of section 10f of the companies act which provides appeal against the order of the company law board. section 10f reads as under:10f. appeals against the order of the company law board - any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the company law board made before the commencement of the companies (second amendment) act, 2002 may file an ..... appeal to the high court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the company law board to him on any question of law arising ..... of retired directors on the theory of 'legitimate expectation' was considered by the high court in detail. it is the stand of the second respondent (chairman of the company), that there was no specific promise that these petitioners would be given directorship permanently. the materials placed and discussed before the clb show that .....

S. Haridas Vs. Official Liquidator, High Court of A.P. and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [2006]133CompCas34(AP); [2007]78SCL145(AP)

..... up of a company by the court shall lie to the same court to which, in the same manner ..... they appear in section 483 of the act. before analysis of this provision and before a reference is made to the judgments referred to above, it would be necessary to reproduce section 483 of the act:appeals from any order made, or decision given before the commencement of the companies (second amendment) act, 2002 in the matter of the winding ..... philip v. official liquidator [2004] 120 comp cas 444 : [2004] 4 comp lj 193. in this judgment also, the court analysed the provisions of the companies act and also of the criminal procedure code and came to the conclusion that (page 449):the ambit of section 483 does not admit any such restricted construction. the expression in .....

Vijay Kumar Karwa Vs. Official Liquidator, Rohtas Inds. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2008SC1613; 2008(3)ALLMR(SC)431; [2008]142CompCas438(SC); (2008)2CompLJ28(SC); JT2008(3)SC325; (2008)3MLJ941(SC); (2008)5MysLJ(SC)775; 2008(3)SCALE311; (2008)4SCC222; 2008AIRSCW1791; 2008(2)Supreme213; 2008(4)KCCRSN257

..... the matter of the winding up of a company by the court shall lie to the same court to which, in the same manner in which, and subject to the same conditions under which ..... as the learned company judge had discussed with the matter in great detail. it was also submitted that the indian railways have already invested huge amounts of money.5. section 483 of the act reads as follows:483. appeals from orders.-appeals from any order made, or decision given before the commencement of the companies (second amendment) act, 2002, in ..... order passed by a division bench of the patna high court summarily dismissing the company appeal no. 4 of 2006 filed by the appellant under section 483 of the companies act, 1956 (in short 'the act').3. background facts in a nutshell are as follows:company case no. 3 of 1984 was filed before the patna high court in .....

Chamaru Etc. Vs. Khazan Singh Etc.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1978HP58

..... on a high court powers of superintendence over any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the armed forces.' subsequently, the constitution (forty-second amendment) act, 1976 was enacted, and section 40 thereof, which was brought into force from feb. 1, 1977, substituted the existing clause (1) by the following clause ..... , before one of us, a question was raised whether the addition of clause (5) in article 227 of the constitution by the constitution (forty-second amendment) act had resulted in depriving this court of its jurisdiction to interfere judicially in respect of judgments and orders of inferior courts. the case was referred to ..... open to appeal or revision.22. accordingly, we hold:(1) article 227 as amended by the constitution (forty-second) amendment act, 1976 does not govern petitions filed under article 227 before feb. 1, 1977. (2) article 227, even after its amendment, continues to confer on a high court the power of judicial superintendence over a .....

Association For Democratics Reforms Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... years. 2 the companies (amendment) act 1969, s 3 substituted of the companies act 1956, s 293a introducing a ban on contributions to political parties. 3 the companies (amendment) act 1985, s 2 replaced of the companies act 1956, s 293a bringing back the 5% cap on contributions to political parties. 4 the companies act 1956, s 293a. 5 for short, the board . 6 second proviso to section 293a(2), companies act, 1956. writ petition ..... (c) no.880 of 2017 & ors. page 2 of 744. the companies act of 2013 replaced the companies act of 1956. section 182(1) of the companies act .....

Cross Vs. Evans

Court : US Supreme Court

..... is not expressly referred to in the certificate. so also, there is no mention in the statement of facts that plaintiff in his second amended petition averred that the texas company was liable to pay plaintiff's claim, by reason of the order of the federal court in the foreclosure suit directing the surrender ..... the receivers were finally discharged in the month of july, 1892. in august, 1893, service was had on the texas company under a second amended petition, in which the texas company was made a codefendant with the receivers, its liability to the plaintiff being asserted to arise from the terms of the order ..... of the circuit court directing the receivers to surrender the property to the kansas company and upon the provisions of a special act of the legislature of texas authorizing the sale by the kansas company .....