Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 4 amendment of section 5 Court: company law board clb Page 1 of about 196 results (0.158 seconds)

Ultrafilter (India) Private Vs. Ultrafilter Gmbh

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2002)112CompCas93

..... has been filed by the petitioner seeking to restrain the respondent from interfering with the affairs of the company, restraining the respondent from any act which would be in competition directly or indirectly with the business of the company, restraining the respondents for claiming any right or do any business in india under ..... between the parties at annexure a-4 is styled as 'shareholders partnership agreement'. a reference to annexure r-13 would indicate that even while considering amendment to the articles, the stand taken by the respondent was that its interest should be protected as a partner in the joint venture company. all ..... into a 'name protection agreement' a 'distributor agreement', a 'trade mark registered user agreement' it also provided for amendment to the articles of the company. pursuant to this agreement, articles were amended providing for requirement of special resolution on certain matters, appointment of one-third of the directors by the respondent, requirement .....

A. Ravishankar Prasad, A. Sai Vs. Prasad Productions Private

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2007)135CompCas416

..... .03.2001 together with profit and loss account, made inter-alia, the following statements :- during the year under review, your company successfully participated in the competitive bid for establishing an imax large format film theatre floated by the government of andhra pradesh as a "tourism development" initiative. the project envisages an 2d/ ..... by the company securing the loans availed by the proposed respondent no. 6 in favour of the financial institutions. in these circumstances, the petitioners ought to have amended the company petition, incorporating the averments, in regard to the imax theatre . project and its implementation by the proposed respondent no. 6. the clb cannot ..... existing in the affairs of the company would clearly make out a case for investigation into, the affairs of the company under section 237(b) of act. these acts of mismanagement need not be proved for the purpose of section 237(b) as held in aditya sharda v. rangoli texdye private limitedchandrika prasad sinha v .....

Bhadresh Kantilal Shah Vs. Magotteaux International and

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2002)111CompCas220

..... [1984] 4 scc 679 ; air 1985 1156 at para. 51, shri diwan submitted that the supreme court, in interpreting section 3 of the foreign awards act as amended by act 47 of 1973 has held that it is the obligation of the court to stay the legal proceedings commenced by a party to a foreign arbitration agreement. in ..... the groups on certain matters. some of the terms of the jva were to be incorporated in the articles of the company. all these agreements, except the non-competition agreement, provided for arbitration more or less in the following terms : "notwithstanding clause . .. . any dispute, controversy claim arising out of or relating to this agreement ..... and the company and a sole distributor agreement between the second respondent and the company were entered into and were annexed to the jva. later, a non-competition agreement was entered into between the first respondent, the tenth respondent and the petitioner. a technical collaboration agreement was entered into on july 1, 1994, between .....

R. Balakrishnan and ors. Vs. Vijay Dairy and Farm Products

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2005)125CompCas661

..... 03.2004. though the first petitioner along with his father and other relatives has incorporated a new company on 22.12.2003, yet never commenced any business in competition with the company in tune with the agreement dated 24.10.2003. the second respondent refused to settle the balance of consideration of rs. 85 lakhs and excluded ..... the matters complained of in the company petition can be brought to an end with the reliefs claimed by the petitioners which are as under: - (a) to amend the articles of association of the company to ensure that the petitioners would be entitled to proportionate voting rights in the general meeting of the company and to have ..... to resign from the board which led to his removal from the post of director by the respondents in accordance with the agreement. o the petitioners further started acting detrimental to the interest of the company by commencing similar business carried on by the company in violation of the terms of the settlement agreement, thereby liable to .....

Aes Opgc Holding (Mauritius) and Vs. Orissa Power Generation

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2005)125CompCas299

..... policy of reform in the power sector, the orissa government decided to divest 49% shares in the company in favour of a strategic partner through international competitive bidding. by a detailed shareholders agreement between the government of orissa and aes corporation, delaware, usa, 41% shares were transferred to the petitioners and ..... managing director had been exercising commercial and financial powers. they have cited the instances of the managing director invoking arbitration, issuing of a circular relating to amendment of ta rules, etc., forgetting that this bench had already stayed the circular resolution relating to restraining managing director, in its order dated 13.11 ..... powers subject to the superintendence, control and direction of the board." 31.1 the amended article, while providing that the managing director shall be in charge of all day-to-day affairs of the company and shall act under the superintendence, has omitted the words 'control and direction of the board'. the .....

Shri Badri Nath Galhotra and Shri Vs. Aanaam Private Limited and ors.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2007)135CompCas534

..... . the allegation of the petitioners that the funds of the company are being siphoned of due to which the profitability has come down is not correct. because of competition from many new hotels that have come up in amritsar, the company has to renovate the hotel incurring substantial expenses. it is to the knowledge of the petitioners ..... of a decision collectively taken by all the partners in a quasi partnership and which has been acted upon also could definitely be termed as an act of oppression. the contention of the respondents that the articles of the company have not been amended in line with the board decision is of no avail. having taken benefit of the said resolution ..... group, they held 58% shares as against the other two groups holding only 42% shares. therefore to protect the interest of minority shareholders, the board decided to amend the articles to provide that the quorum for board meetings would be three represented by one director from each group. the articles are yet to be .....

P.V. Premnath Vs. Tvs Motor Co. Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB Chennai

..... impleading pvp as second defendant in the madurai suit, in terms of an order dated 19-7-2004 made in i.a. no. 216 of 2004. after filing the amended plaint by ms in the madurai suit in july, 2004 pvp had filed written statement making a counter-claim in respect of the impugned shares against ms, in september, 2004 ..... the petitioner claims title to shares by virtue of the recitals forming part of paras 9 and 10 of the amended petition and consciously deleted the charges made against the company in his counter-claim as reflected in para 14 of the amended plaint of the madurai suit. the entire paras 16(b), (c) pertaining to reliefs claimed against the company ..... act. while following this proposition of law, the clb held in s. kanthimathy v. woodlands estates ltd. [2008] 83 scl 491 (clb - chennai) that a combined reading of sections 111(5) and 111a(7) would show that transmission of shares by operation of law is also governed by section 111a. m.s. kumanan v. s.s.m. processing mills ltd. [2007 .....

Mrs. Sapna Gupta Vs. Jagran Publications (P.) Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB Delhi

..... affirmative vote by inmil. article 2(j) envisages uncontrolled power with the up group in regard to the control of policies and management. in view of the amended articles after inmil became a shareholder, without its consent and concurrence, mp group cannot control the affairs of the company. insofar as the arguments that provisions of ..... only in cases of rectification of register in relation to transfer/transmission of shares. it is to be noted that before amendment to the companies act in 1988, the provisions of section 111 of the act were part of two sections, namely, section 111 and section 155. while the present provisions of section 111(1) to (3) ..... jurisdiction to decide any question which is necessary or expedient to decide in connection with an application under this section. 5. santosh ajit sachdeva v. anoopi shahani [2007] 7 scc 675. to control a company, mere holding of majority shares is not sufficient but something more is required to prove that one is actually controlling .....

Descon Ltd. Vs. Dpsc Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB Kolkata

..... parties. any direction that descon should be given the right to match the highest offer would only make the bidding process more of a price finding exercise than a real competitive bid. therefore, i do not propose to grant this prayer. 42. however, there are certain factors in favour of descon, which necessitate application of equitable principles in granting ..... descon consisted of the employees of aycl even though it was not a shareholder. 5. on september 28, 2001, in the annual general meeting, descon passed a resolution to amend its articles to provide for buy-back of its shares. in october, 2001, aycl filed a suit c.s. no. 504 of 2001 before the calcutta high court ..... cas. 151 (ker.); [2007] 2 comp. lj 143, the supreme court has not held that this doctrine cannot be applied in section 397 proceeding. it has only held that in the facts of that case, this doctrine could not have been applied. the settled law is that creation of a new majority is an act of oppression. in the present .....

Nagesh Kumar Vs. Nagesh Hosiery Exports Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB Delhi

..... therefor more than 10 years. reliance was placed on the report of mr. naresh arora associates filed by the respondents themselves by letter dated 29-5-2007. it was pointed out that the respondents have clearly reduced the said reserves. it was contended that removing the reserves fraudulently constitutes gross mismanagement and ..... petition has been filed by p-1 and p-2 respectively. however, p-1 has not signed the rejoinder and the additional affidavit, dated 25-9-2007 and february 2008, respectively, therefore, petitioner no. 1 has abandoned the petition altogether. 13. shri krishan kumar, counsel for the petitioners, responding to the ..... and, on the contrary, the petitioners have been doing continuous acts of oppression against the respondents as the petitioners have been carrying on several business-firms, directly and/or indirectly, particularly nagesh classic, nagesh exclusive and nrs knitwears, etc., in competition with respondent no. 1-company for number of years using unlawful .....