Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: special court trial of offences relating to trnsactions in securities act 1992 section 7 jurisdiction of special court Page 12 of about 361 results (0.162 seconds)

S. Kanthimathy, S. Lakshmi, S. Vs. the Woodlands Estates Limited and

Court : Company Law Board CLB

Reported in : (2008)144CompCas830

..... the supreme court, while dealing with the scope of the special court constituted under the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992, held that the special court "is intended to encompass curial or judicial bodies which have the jurisdiction to decide matters or claims, inter alia, arising out of transactions in securities entered into between the stated dates in which a person notified is involved. ..... in terms of section 2(11), the "court" means with respect to any matter relating to a company other than any offence against this act, the court having jurisdiction under this act with respect to that matter relating to that company as provided in section 10. ..... the person aggrieved, or am' member of the company, or the company, may apply to the company law board for rectification of the register (5) the company law board, while dealing with an appeal preferred under sub-section (2) or an application made under sub-section (4) may, after hearing the parties, either dismiss the appeal or reject the application, or by order- (a) direct that the transfer or transmission shall he registered by the company and the company shall comply with .....

Canbank Investment Management Vs. P. Sri Sai Ram

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... the executives of the investment manager has been held guilty of contempt of court by the special court constituted under the special court (trial of offence relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 at mumbai. ..... out that it is clear from the order of adjudication dated 13-1-2000 made by chairman, sebi, that the adjudicating officer was ordered to adjudge the matter with reference to the alleged violation of section 15d(6) of the securities and exchange board of india act, 1992 ('the act'). ..... the adjudicating officer may impose penalty if any, in terms of section 15d(b) of sebi act, 1992 (15 of 1992) read with regulation 10(a) and regulation 76 of sebi (mutual funds) regulations, ..... ratio in the mayuri pulse mill's case (supra) is also of no help to the appellant.in fact in the said case the division bench of the bombay high court while considering the provisions of section 138 of the negotiable instruments act had observed that "normally in criminal law existence of guilty intent is an essential ingredient of a crime and in principal is expressed the maxim actus non facit rum nisi mens ..... , refuted the appellant's contention that the adjudicating officer had assumed authority beyond the ambit of the order of adjudication, stating that reference to section 15e, instead of section 15ed is only a matter of citing the proper section under which the penal provision has been provided in the act and that it was not a question of resorting to any non-existent penal provision as alleged. .....

Delhi Stock Exchange and anr. Vs. K.C. Sharma and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2002VIIAD(Delhi)432; 98(2002)DLT234

..... sebi (merchants bankers) regulation, 1992.the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992.in 1993 again, several statutes were brought on the statute book which are:sebi (appeal to central government) ..... other than a ready delivery contract, entered into after a date to be notified in this behalf by the provincial government shall be void, unless the same is made subject to and in accordance with the rules duly sanctioned under section 5 and every such contract shall be void unless the same is made every such contract shall be void unless the same is made between members or through a member of a recognized stock exchange; and no claim shall be ..... we accordingly hold that even if stock exchange was not regarded 'state' under article 12 it could still be amenable to writ jurisdiction under article 226 in certain cases where it was shown that it was performing statutory/public duty cast on it under the statute, rules and bye-laws giving rise to an obligation which it owned to the ..... salve has also submitted that the earlier decision of this court in delhi stock exchange association limited (supra) related to the periods prior to 1956 and that thereafter the securities contract and regulation act 1956 has been enacted and the assessed has been recognized as a stock exchange under the said act and is being treated as a public authority amenable to the jurisdiction of this court and the high court under article 32 and 226 of the constitution.'8. mr. .....

Centre of India Trade Unions Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

..... the apex court was interpreting the provision of section 6, 7 of section 3(2) of the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992. ..... in these circumstances the inevitable conclusion is that the ambit of the special courts jurisdiction, whether in criminal proceedings or in civil disputes is in respect of the transactions in securities entered into after the 1st day of april, 1991 and on or before 6th day of june, 1992.15. ..... if it is the former, the jurisdiction of the special court would be, as contended by the appellant, limited to offences committed within the period specified whenever the transactions may have taken place ..... any offence relating to transactions in securities after the 1st day of april, 1991 and on and before 6th june, 1992.... ..... ' the position has been further clarified by section 9a(1)(b) (introduced by way of amendment in 1994) which confers on the special court all the jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable immediately before the commencement of the amended act by any civil court in relation to inter alia, any matter or claim -arising out of transactions in securities entered into after the 1st day of april 1991, and on or before the 6th day of june, 1992, in which a person notified under sub-section (2) of section 3 is involved as a party, broker, intermediary or in any ..... from the language used it is apparent that the period relates to the transaction in securities and that the date of the offence is immaterial. .....

Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Limited Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... ketan parekh (2008) 8 scc148 this court held that section 9a of the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the special court act ) must be considered to be legislation that is subsequent to the recovery act, since section 9a was introduced by amendment, into the special court act after the recovery act. ..... , sections 59 to 70 and sections 79 and 80 which bar the jurisdiction of civil courts and deal with 48 cognizance of offences under the rera were all brought into force one year later i.e. ..... website, for public viewing, and enter the names and photographs of real estate agents who have applied and registered under this act, with such details as may be prescribed, including those whose registration has been rejected or revoked; (e) to fix through regulations for each areas under its jurisdiction the standard fees to be levied on the allottees or the promoter or the real estate agent, as the case may be; (f) to ensure compliance of the obligations ..... cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents under this act and the rules and regulations made thereunder; 69 (g) to ensure compliance of its regulations or orders or directions .....

State of U.P. Vs. Rajiv Kumar Mishra and Anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... appeals filed under section 10 of the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 arise out of a transaction which occurred as a part of the same scam, which have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.07.2010, as modified by the order dated 07.10.2010 in suit no.6 of 1994, passed by the special court, bombay, constituted under the above act. ..... the original of the said note which was with the bank reflected a true and accurate statement of what had transpired on 07 november 1992 and further confirmed that the bank may refer to and rely upon the same in any legal proceedings as it may deem appropriate the learned special court had disregarded the testimony of pw-3 srinivasan in the following terms: the evidence of pw-3 srinivasan itself does not inspire confidence since though he ..... ram jethmalani, the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellant, contends that the period of limitation started running on 07.11.1992, and that the finding of the learned special court that no meeting took place on that date is perverse for the reason that it is contrary to legal evidence on record and therefore deserves to be ..... senior counsel further contends that the said finding of the learned special court ignores the provision of sections 159 & 160 of the indian evidence act, 1872 (hereinafter the evidence act ). ..... reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos.9540-9541 of2010standard chartered bank .....

Standard Chartered Bank Vs. andhra Bank Financial Services Ltdand Ors

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... appeals filed under section 10 of the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 arise out of a transaction which occurred as a part of the same scam, which have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.07.2010, as modified by the order dated 07.10.2010 in suit no.6 of 1994, passed by the special court, bombay, constituted under the above act. ..... the original of the said note which was with the bank reflected a true and accurate statement of what had transpired on 07 november 1992 and further confirmed that the bank may refer to and rely upon the same in any legal proceedings as it may deem appropriate the learned special court had disregarded the testimony of pw-3 srinivasan in the following terms: the evidence of pw-3 srinivasan itself does not inspire confidence since though he ..... ram jethmalani, the learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellant, contends that the period of limitation started running on 07.11.1992, and that the finding of the learned special court that no meeting took place on that date is perverse for the reason that it is contrary to legal evidence on record and therefore deserves to be ..... senior counsel further contends that the said finding of the learned special court ignores the provision of sections 159 & 160 of the indian evidence act, 1872 (hereinafter the evidence act ). ..... reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos.9540-9541 of2010standard chartered bank .....

American Express International Banking Corporation Vs. Commissioner of ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(3)BomCR193; [2002]258ITR601(Bom)

..... ) is presiding in the special court set up under the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992. ..... enumerated in the different clauses were mutually exclusive and each specific head related to items of income arising from a particular source and on that reasoning, the court held that even though the securities were part of the trading assets of the company doing business, the interest income had to be assessed under section 8 of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (corresponding to section 18 of the income-tax act, 1961).findings :(a) comparison between the assessee's method of accounting and the ..... 's case : [1957]32itr688(sc) , the assessee-bank claimed a set-off under section 24(2) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (section 71(1) of the present act), against its income from interest on securities under section 8 of the 1922 act (similar to section 18 of the present act). ..... questions in income-taxreference no.75 of 1986 : (1)whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunalwas right in holding that for the purposes of computing the disallowanceunder section 40a(5) of the income-tax act, 1961,rule 3of the income-tax rules, 1962, cannot beinvoked in the case of the applicant for determining the value ofrent-free accommodation and the conveyance provided to their employees in the affirmative, i.e. .....

American Express International Banking Corporation Vs. Cit

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)177CTR(Bom)442

..... special court set up under the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 ..... in different clauses were mutually exclusive and each specific head related to items of-income arising from a particular source and on that reasoning, the court held that even though the securities were part of trading assets of the company doing business, the interest income had to be assessed under section 8 of the income tax act 1922 (corresponding to section 18 of the income tax act 1961)findings(a) comparison between assessee's method of accounting and ..... -bank claimed a set off under section 24(2) of the income tax act 1922 (section 71(1) of the present act) against its income from interest on securities under section 8 of the 1922 act (similar to section 18 of the present act). ..... whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that for the purpose of computing the disallowance under section 40a(5) of the income tax act 1961, rule 3 of the income tax rules 1962, cannot be invoked in the case of the applicant for determining the value of rent-free accommodation ..... 75 of 1986 (1) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that for the purposes of computing the disallowance under section 40a(5) of the income tax act, 1961, rule 3 of the income tax rules, 1962 cannot be invoked in the case of the applicant for determining the value of rent-free accommodation and the conveyance .....

M/S. Svpcllimited,d. No.11-13-173/11and12 Vs. The State Bank ofindia ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

..... in solidaire india ltd.v.fairgrowth financial services ltd the supreme court, after examining the scope of section 13 of the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 and section 32 of sica, held that both these acts were special acts; and, in such an event, it was the later act, namely, the special court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) act, 1992 which should prevail.g.test to be applied to resolve the inter-se conflict between competing non-obstante clauses in two different enactments: when two or more laws operate in the same field, and each ..... reference under regulation 19(5) thereof, are events posterior to the reference made to the bifr, by the board of directors of the sick industrial company, under regulation 19(1).in view of the bar under the second proviso to section 15(1) of sica, the very reference to the bifr is without jurisdiction, and consequently the subsequent act of registration of the reference as case no.89 of 2013, or commencement of the enquiry under section 16(1) of sica or for that matter remedial measures being taken under ..... a counter-affidavit is filed, on behalf of the 1st respondent- bank, wherein it is stated that the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this court by way of w.p.no.27357 of 2011 questioning the order of the drat dated 08.09.2011; the said writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits; thereafter the petitioner filed w.p.no.32980 of 2013 which was disposed of by .....