Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi837
p.n. khanna, j.(1) the only question that has come up for consideration before the division bench is : whether the day on which the notice of the general meeting of the company is served and the day on which the meeting is held are to be excluded, when calculating 21 days, the period of notice, prescribed under section 171 of the companies act, 1956, herein referred to as 'the 1956 act'. section 171(1) of the 1956 act reads as. follows :- '171(1).-a general meeting of the company may be called by giving not less than 21 days notice in writing.' (2) mr. s. n. chopra, the learned counsel for the defendant, contended that the phrase 'not less than 21 days notice' has to be construed with reference to section 53(2) of the 1956 act, which prescribes the time when the service of the notice of a meeting shall be deemed to have been effected. the relevant portion of section 53(2) of the act reads as follows: '53(2).-wherea document is sent by post,- (a) service thereof shall be deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document......; and (b) such service shall be deemed to have been effected- (i) in the case of a notice of a meeting, at the expiration of forty-eight hours after the letter containing the same is posted, and (ii) in any other case, at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.' (3) according to mr. chopra, 21 days of the notice, required under section 171, start running when the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1987)(11)LC212Tri(Delhi)
..... suburban industrial works held licences for the manufacture of the man-coolers; and duty had not been paid on the 193 fans removed in the period and the removals were without gate passes and without maintenance of accounts of production etc. m/s. s.f. ..... in the investigations, the central excise found that m/s.suburban industrial works understood and engaged in the manufacture of electric fans from 5.7.1967 to 10.6.1969and manufactured 193 man-cooler fans which were removed from the factory to m/s. ..... , were charged by the central excise with removing 193 man-cooler fans from their factory from 5.7.1967 to 10.6.1969. ..... seems to be a good deal about this case that has not come out totally and that more is hidden from the public view than has been disclosed.11.the appellants are mistaken to say that man-coolers are industrial fans for cooling machines. ..... venna pointed out that only 93 of the man-cooler fans were actually manufactured by m/s. ..... the goods, man-cooler fans, had no special shape or design to entitle them to be called industrial fans. ..... india limited were said to have held the goodwill and proprietary rights on the man-cooler fans. ..... they are man-coolers i.e. ..... the man-cooler fans. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... all the aforesaid three recovered identity cards bear the similar photos of only one and the same man and these photographs resemble with the face of the aforesaid deceased terrorist. ..... this noble ideal cannot be realized if the poor man charged with crime has to face his accusers without a lawyer to assist him. ..... in cassette ex.c-2, analysis was confined to four sentences, two relating to the man's voice and two relating to the woman's voice. ..... gilani, he stated that he was not a technical man nor does he deal with the computers from which these bills were collected nor he was involved in the management or upkeep of the computer. ..... pw-41, ajay kumar deposed that he was a sales man in the sawan dry fruits and kriana shop at fateh puri. ..... this solitary act by one man would be more devastating then a 1000 armed men attacking the parliament. ..... the conversation, in hindi, was between a man named shaukat and a woman. ..... and right hand man of maulana ajhar masood and gazi baba. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1947)49BOMLR633
..... it is practically a one man company as all the shares are either owned by the gwalior durbar or its nominees. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1999MP258; 2000(1)MPLJ605
orderr.s. garg, j. 1. by this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india the petitioner seeks relief that the respondents be commanded to treat the petitioner qualified as per rule 2.4.1 of the p.p.t. rules and the respondents be commanded to grant opportunity to the petitioner to appear in the councilling and she be given admission in p.p.t. course 1998 in the college as per her merits in the list.2. brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are; that the petitioner took up her examination for session 1997-98 of 10th class conducted by the central board of secondary education. it appears that she could not clear all the subjects in the first attempt therefore, in hindi course a she was given compartment. after appearing in the examination the petitioner also took up examination of pre-polytechnic test (ppi) 1998 which is in fact a entrance test conducted by the professional examination board, m. p. the petitioner passed in the ppt examination and could secure 68.48%. it appears that before the petitioner took part in the councilling she had taken compartment examinations and she was declared passed. in the councilling dated 16-9-98 it was observed by the committee that as the petitioner has not passed in the main examination she was not entitled to be admitted to thecourse of ppt, they accordingly refused to grant her admission. being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed this petition.3. the submission of shri .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1947]15ITR367(Bom)
..... it is practically a one man company as all the shares are either owned by the gwalior durbar or its nominees. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* in the high court of delhi at new delhi + cm(m) 81/2012 & cm12252012 (stay) decided on:22. d january, 2015 % asim khan through: ..... petitioner mr. risha mittal and mr. vatsal kumar, advocates. versus zahid ali & ors through: none. coram: hon'ble ms. justice mukta gupta ..... respondent mukta gupta, j.(oral) 1. the petitioner impugnes the order dated 30th november, 2011 whereby the application under order 6 rule 17 cpc, filed by the petitioner before the learned trial court seeking amendment of the plaint, was dismissed.2. notice in this petition has been served on respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4. respondent no.3 had already been proceeded ex-parte before the learned trial court. despite service of notice, none has entered appearance on behalf of respondent no.4. today, despite three pass overs, none is present on behalf of respondents. thus, i have proceeded to hear and dispose of the matter.3. the petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit being cs (os) no.578/2010 on 28th july, 2010 which was registered on 18th november, 2010. in the suit, the petitioner claimed possession, declaration and mandatory injunction against the respondents/defendants. it was stated by the plaintiff that he had purchased property no.145 part of khasra no.127, main market road, okhla village, jamia nagar, new delhi admeasuring 52 sq. yards from defendant nos. 1 and 2 vide documents i.e. general power of attorney, agreement to sale and purchase, affidavit and will, all executed on 31st february, 2010. all .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2001(2)WLN216
shethna, j. (1). madarsah taiyabiah society of udaipur filed s.b. civil writ petition no. 4084/94 before this court under article 226 of the constitution and prayed that the impugned order at annex. 13 dated 19.7.94 be quashed and set aside. (2). the petitioner is a registered society. it is running school having about 1800 students in the school building which according to it was a very small one, therefore, they wanted some more land for extension of the school building. accordingly, it approached the collector, udaipur who in turn recommended to the secretary, urban improvement trust on 30,6.72 (annex. 1) for allotment of land to the petitioner. by a resolution dated 24.5.84, the u.i.t. udaipur also recommended the allotment of land to the petitioner and accordingly, wrote a letter dated 10.10.84 (annex. 2) to the state government. in turn, the state government directed u.i.t. to allot the land to the petitioner by its letter dated 3.1.85 (annex. 3). consequent thereof, the u.i.t. allotted 6361 sq. ft. land to the petitioner for only rs. 1,20,859/-. the said amount was deposited by the petitioner along with its letter dated 17.3.85 (annex. 4). the u.i.t. executed a document of transfer in favour of the petitioner which is at annex. 5. (3). ii is contended in the petition by the petitioner that there was a city wall which was about 5-6 feet away from the school building which is about 10 feet wide, the same was removed by municipal council, udaipur in 1978-79. the said land .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1) leave granted in all the special leave petitions. 2) these appeals seek to challenge the common judgment and order of the division bench of the high court of karnataka dated 05.06.2009 arising out of writ appeal no. 5084 of 2008 and allied matters and the decision of the state government dated 26/27.02.2002 as well as the central government dated 29.07.2003.3) the appellants in these appeals are sandur manganese & iron ores ltd. (in short "sandur") and m/s mspl ltd. the principal respondents are m/s kalyani steels ltd. (in short "kalyani") and m/s jindal vijayanagar steels ltd. (in short "jindal"). apart from these, the state of karnataka and the union of india are also arrayed as respondents.4) factual matrix:a) the case of sandur (petitioner in slp (c) no. 22077 of 2009) is as follows:(i) shri y.r. ghorpade, ex-ruler of sandur state, was granted lease for mining of iron & manganese ores under order no. geo.ms.068 dated 26.02.1953, for a period of 20 years commencing from 01.01.1954 to the extent of 29 sq. miles, falling within the boundaries of the sandur state. on 18.01.1954, the appellant-company was incorporated as a private limited company under the provisions of the companies act, 1956. on 21/23.06.1956, a lease was transferred in favour of the company as per government order no. i.1432-38 ge43.55-22. on 28.11.1964, the company was converted into a public limited company. in 1965, the company, with the aim of value addition to ores mined by the company and also to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 128(2006)DLT649; 2006(32)PTC15(Del)
..... in amritdhara pharmacy's case (supra), the product was examined from the prospect of it being purchased by villagers and townfolk, literate as well as illiterate and, thus, the question has to be approached from the point of view of a man of average intelligence and imperfect recollection. ..... in amritdhara's case air 1963 449 (supra) where it was observed that the products will be purchased by both villagers and townfolk, literate as well as illiterate and the question has to be approached from the point of view of a man of average intelligence and imperfect recollection. ..... 'at para [8], it was observed:-'that a man cannot acquire a trade mark by color alone has been stated a good many times in decisions and textbooks ....''... ..... my opinion is, having regard to the nature of the customer, the article in question and the price at which it is likely to be sold, and all the surrounding circumstances, no man of ordinary intelligence is likely to be deceived....'28. ..... that a man cannot acquire a trade mark by color alone has been stated a good many times in decisions and text books. .....
Tag this Judgment!