Court : Company Law Board CLB
Decided on : Nov-01-1991
..... party", as defined in the regulations, means a person who files an application or petition before a bench, the respondent, registrar of companies or the regional director and includes any person who has a right under the companies act, 1956, to make suggestions or objections.shri mukherjee pointed out that since the petitioners were not parties before this bench in the proceedings under section 111 of the companies act, 1956, and section 22a of the securities contracts (regulation) act, 1956, they have no right to make a review ..... industrial investment and development corporation who hold 18.48 and 43.92 per cent. of shares of the company respectively, shall be able to sell shares of the company in small lots through approved brokers up to one per cent. of the paid-up capital of the company each without making a reference to the company law board. the life insurance corporation, the industrial finance corporation of india and industrial development corporation of india, united india insurance company limited and nationalised ..... of funds. the sales are generally effected in the market in small lots through approved brokers at different centres. sales in bigger lots are made to investment institutions, mostly to the unit trust of india, life insurance corporation and the general insurance corporation through direct negotiation at their request. it is also mentioned that while dis investing shares in the market, care is taken that such shares do not disturb management control or .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-15-1991
Reported in : [1992]193ITR141(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in withdrawing super tax rebate on the dividends of Rs. 13,89,000 and Rs. 7,82,500 paid by the applicants during the year under consideration for the accounting years 1948-49 and 1949-50, respectively, on the basis of the decision of the Bombay High Court under section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ?' 2. The assessee is a company carrying on the business of manufacturing and sale of sugar. The relevant assessment year is 1965-66. The previous year ended on May 31, 1964. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee paid dividends of Rs. 13,89,000 and Rs. 7,82,500 to its shareholders pertaining to the accounting years 1948-49 and 1949-50. In respect of the accounting years 1948-49 and 1949-50, the Income-tax Officer had passed an order imposin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-31-1991
Reported in : (1992)2MLJ539
Venkataswami, J.1. The plaintiff in O.S. No. 50 of 1982, on the file of the court of Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, has preferred this appeal.2. Pending disposal of the appeal, the appellant/plaintiff died and the second respondent (son of the deceased appellant) in the appeal has filed C.M.P. No. 10153 of 1991, claiming to be the sole legal representative of the deceased appellant, and praying for transposing him as the second appellant in the above appeal. After hearing learned Counsel on both sides, we have ordered that petition. However, for the sake of convenience, the appellant will be hereafter referred to as the plaintiff and the contesting first respondent as first defendant.3. Before going into the facts, it will be useful to narrate the relationship between the parties. One Ranganathan was the son of the plaintiff (husband of the first defendant). On the death of Ranganathan, the cause of action for the suit has arisen. The second defendant (now the second appellant in this ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Dec-31-1991
Reported in : (1992)1MLJ568
ORDERBakthavatsalam, J.1. The prayer in the writ petition is for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to restore the petitioner, the possession of the V.O.C. park canteen, drive-in-restaurant, Coimbatore by renewing the lease in favour of the petitioner in respect of the said premises for the period from 1.4.1988.2. The petitioner took part in auction of a land and building comprises in V.O.C. compound, Coimbatore, from the respondent/Municipality when the leasehold interest was auctioned. He was granted lease for three years to run a restaurant in the premises. It seems the petitioner was paying Rs. 375 per month rent from 1981, which was enhanced to Rs. 1,163 from 1984, on the respondent becoming a City Municipal Corporation. In March 1987, the respondent asked the petitioner to vacate the premises within 24 hours on the ground that they proposed to suction the leasehold interest. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.842 of 1987 on the file of the District Munsi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-27-1991
Reported in : 1992(2)ALT135
A. Lakshmana Rao, J.1. The Petitioners are engaged in the manufacture and sale of vegetable oils. By virtue of Section 3 of the Vegetable Oils Cess Act, 1983 (Act No. 30 of 1983), cess is leviable on vegetable oils produced in any mill in the country. This Act came into force with effect from January 1, 1984 whereas the assent of the President was received on September 7, 1983. Parliament also enacted the National Oil Seeds and Vegetable Oils Development Board Act, 1983 (Act No. 29 of 1983) to provide for the development of the oil seeds and vegetable oils industry under the control of the Union and for matters connected therewith. This Act received the assent of the President on September 8, 1983. Under this Act, the Central Government is conferred power to constitute the National Oil seeds and Vegetable Oils Development Board (for short the Board). In exercise of that power, a Board has been established 'In order to ensure that the said Board has the necessary resources to discharge ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-1991
Reported in : 2(1993)ACC188
S.M. Daud, J.1. This appeal is by the driver, owner and insurer of a private motor bus bearing registration No. MTT 4383, the driving of which motor bus led to the death of Vithal Gopal Patil whose widow and children are arrayed as respondent No. 1 before us.2. Respondent No. 2 had hired the bus mentioned above and it was in the course of a task being executed for the second respondent that the bus on 16.11.1981 at about 6.00 a.m. dashed against Vithal leaving him dead instantaneously. At the time of his death Vithal was in the employ of Siemens (I) Ltd., his designation being that of a Draughtsman. Vithal was 45 years of age and was to retire on the attainment of age of 60 years. His sons Vinay, Prashant and Sandesh were 12,9 and 4 years old at the time of passing away of their father, while his widow Kusum must have been just out of her twenties for she gave out her age to be 31 years when she came to testify before the Tribunal on 14.10.1983. The Claim lodged by the widow and the so...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-17-1991
Reported in : 1991(3)KarLJ68
S.P. Bharucha, C.J. 1. This is a reference under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act'). The question that we are called upon to answer, at the instance of the Revenue, reads thus : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by holding that the value of debentures issued in favour of financial institutions represented borrowings from these institutions and that they fulfilled the requirements of the provisions of rule 1(v) of the Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1975-76. 3. In arriving at the capital base for the computation of surtax, the assessee claimed that the average value of the debentures which it had issued in favour of five institutions formed part of its capital base for surtax purpose. The debentures were issued on October 1, 1973. They were issued to the Industrial C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Dec-13-1991
Reported in : (1992)(59)ELT482TriDel
1. Being dissatisfied with the demand of duty on filter bags and imposition of penalty as detailed out in the impugned Order, the appellants have filed their present appeal.2. Shortly put the facts of the case are that the appellants M/s.Gwalior Sugar Co. Ltd. are manufacturers of Sugar and Molasses falling under Chapter 17 of CET, 1985. A show cause notice dated 14-8-1989 was issued to the appellants calling upon them to show cause as to why the Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 1,95,459.91 be not demanded from them on the allegation that they consumed 10,359 Filter bags manufactured out of 23,307.320 mtrs. of Polyproplene cloth purchased by them from the market during the period 1-3-1986 to 15-5-1989 and also to show cause as to why penalty be not imposed upon them. In reply, the appellants submitted that they purchased polypropylene cloth from the market and no filter cloth bags as such were manufactured by them. They only cut and stitch the cloth purchased from the manufacturer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Dec-13-1991
Reported in : [1992(65)FLR110]; (1995)IIILLJ703Ker
Balakrishnan, J. 1. The petitioner is a manufacturer and distributor of drugs, pharmaceutical, food products and laboratory chemicals. Medical representatives are employed by the petitioner for the purpose of canvassing sale of products. One T.L. Kuriakose was a medical representative of the petitioner-company. Being a medical representative he was required to call on doctors, hospitals, stockists, chemists and druggists and to take efforts to canvass, promote and push sales of the company's products. In exercise of the powers and discretion vested in the petitioner-company under the terms of appointment, the petitioner used to transfer the medical representatives from one centre to another, in February, 1980 white Kuriakose was working as medical representative at Calicut he was transferred to Bijapur in the State of Karnataka. Kuriakose wanted to remain in the home State. So he applied to review the transfer order, but his application was rejected and he was informed that in the even...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-11-1991
Reported in : 1993(1)ALT566
Radhakrishna Rao, J.1. The claim has been made on account of the death of the son of the 1st petitioner and the father of the 2nd petitioner in the O.P.No. 340/87. The accident that occurred on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle is undisputed. An amount of Rs. 34,000/- and odd has been awarded as compensation. The Insurance company filed the present appeal.2. The contention that has been raised by the Insurance Company is that the vehicle has to be used for carrying goods or for agricultural purpose but the vehicle involved in the accident is used for sprinkling water purpose which is prohibited under Section 96 of the Statute. Under the circumstances, this court feels that the liability can be fixed jointly on the Insurance Corporation as well as the owner of the vehicle but the entire liability cannot be fixed on the Insurance Company. Therefore, taking into account Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act and the relevant decision of this court, thi...
Tag this Judgment!