Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
..... the argument, is, of course, the provisions of the statute in question: in this case sections 164 and 165 of the companies act 1948."98. in india, in suresh koshy george v. the university of kerala and others this court observed (at page 322):"the question whether the requirements of natural justice have been met by the procedure ..... . god did not pass sentence upon adam and eve before giving an opportunity to show cause as to why they had eaten forbidden fruit. [see r.v. university of cambridge. but we are also aware that principles of natural justice are not rigid or immutable and hence they cannot be imprisoned in a straight-jacket. they ..... conveyed to the petitioners outside territory of the state of rajasthan. reference of the following judgments have been made to substantiate the arguments: (i) eastern coalfields ltd. versus state of sikkim reported in (2008) 3 scc 456; (ii) kusum ingots & alloys ltd. versus union of india reported in (2004) 6 scc 254; (iii) alchemist ltd. & ors. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
..... not be entertained. a reference of the judgment in the case of bombay dyeing & mfg. co. ltd. v. bombay environmental action group & ors. reported in 2006 (3) scc 434 and shiv nandan gaurishankar v. laxmi vilas textile reported in 2008 (13) scc 323 has been given. other preliminary objection is of res judicata ..... land worth crores. however, the affidavits given by the chief secretary, state of rajasthan clarifies the position, thus we need not to makeobservation regarding the act of the official respondents.21. the writ petition is accordingly allowed holding that the private respondents are not in rightful possession of the property in question, ..... 1973 to acquire the land of ram bagh area and, thereafter, a gazette notification was issued under the provisions of rajasthan urban improvement trust act, 1959 (for short uit act of 1959). acquisition was challenged by brigadier bhawani singh (erstwhile ruler), gandhi grah nirman co-operative society and many other persons. acquisition proceedings .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan Jaipur
..... 04/08/2009 on having purchased lease hold rights through respondent-6 (secured creditor) under securitisation & reconstruction of financial assets & enforcement of security interest act, 2002 (sarfaesi act), but has been dispossessed on 09/03/2010 pursuant to warrant of possession issued by the executing court, jhunjhunu on 05/03/2010 in execution appl ..... consent of lessor (respondent-2 to 4) but this material fact was not disclosed. on application being filed under arbitration act, sole arbitrator was appointed by the court vide order dt.15/09/2006 to decide the dispute of breaches being committed & determination of lease deed and after adjudication in course of arbitration proceedings ..... to 4 being party to creation of mortgage to take recourse as provided u/s 17 of sarfaesi act by approaching drt. in support, counsel placed reliance upon decision of delhi high court in kohinoor creations v. syndicate bank (2006 (132) co. cases 417). counsel for respondents-2 to 4 & 7 jointly submit that .....
Tag this Judgment!