Corporate Law Judgements

Madras High Court case of C. Kumaravel v. The Director General of Police and ors., has reiterated that Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is not an alternate remedy to Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on refusal of police to

In September, 1991, an investment of Rs.65 crores came to be made by four subscribers, who applied for purchase of CANCIGO units floated by (Canbank Mutual Fund (hereinafter referred to as ‘CMF’), a fund created by Canara Bank. The Andhra Bank and An

The spinal issue that has spiralled to this Court is whether the Company Judge under the Companies Act, 1956 (for short “the 1956 Act”) has jurisdiction at the instance of the Official Liquidator to set aside the auction or sale held by the Recovery

The present appeal under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (“the SEBI Act”) is directed against the impugned judgment and final order dated 9th November, 2011 passed by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (“the

The Appellant herein as landlord filed a suit for eviction against the respondent company on the ground of default in making payment of the rents and also on grounds of reasonable requirement, in the City Civil Court at Calcutta, under the provisions

This petition has been filed under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (the Act) by Sony India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as petitioner/transferor company), in respect of a scheme of arrangement (scheme for short) between the

In sequel to orders passed by this Court with the earnest efforts of Mediators, namely, Mr. J.S. Bhogal, Senior Advocate and Mr. Pawan Thakur, Advocate, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The parties have jointly placed on reco

Company Petition No.95 of 2004 was a petition under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) vide which sanction of this Court to the scheme of Amalgamation of Indrama Investment Private Limited (transfer

The disputes in the present case centre around the election to Sports Working Committee of the Delhi District and Cricket Association (DDCA). Sports Working Committee is a smaller body within the DDCA‟s Executive Committee.

The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’) is directed against the Award dated 25th January 2006 passed by the learned Arbitrator (‘Respondent No.2’) holding that the claims of the Petitioner in respect