Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.47 seconds)
Documents citing East Indian Produce Ltd. vs Naresh Acharya Bhaduri And Ors. on 9 August, 1985

Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs Lazor Detergents Private Ltd. And Ors. on 20 October, 1993

Another case we have come across in this regard is East Indian Produce Ltd. v. Naresh Acharya Bhaduri [1988] 64 Comp Cas 259 in which the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court observed (at page 285) : "In our opinion, the above observation was made by Ajit Kumar Sen Gupta J. in a different context. If, however, the said observation of His Lordship means that if an illegal contract is performed in part by a party, it is not open to it to contend subsequently that it is not legal or valid, then, with respect, we are unable to agree with the above view of His Lordship. If a contract is not legal or valid, then by acting upon it by any of the parties thereto, the same cannot be said to be valid or legal. Acting by the parties upon a contract, which is contrary to any provision of law or statute and as such is illegal, invalid and not unenforceable cannot make the same legal, valid and enforceable".
Company Law Board Cites 55 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs U.B. Ltd. And Others on 5 December, 1991

In support of this cognition, reliance was placed by Mr. Cooper on a judgment of Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in East Indian Produce Ltd. v. Naresh Acharya Bhaduri [1988] 64 Comp Cas 259. It is true that the prayer that was sought in the said case was somewhat similar and the court did observe that the relief sought could not be granted, as the performance of the contract depended on the volition of other parties.
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 7 - B N Srikrishna - Full Document

Orissa Sponge Iron & vs Mrs. Margaret T. Desor And Others on 22 February, 2011

19. In relation to Ground No.(f), it was contended that Section 397 and 398 of the Companies Act could not have been used for seeking conversion of warrants into equity shares which had been transferred without following the mandatory provision of the securities Contract Regulation Act specially considering the submission of the respondents that warrants are marketable securities and thus covered by the Companies Act. Referring to the cases of East Indian Produce Ltd. v. Naresh Acharya Bhaduri and others, reported in 1988 (64) Company Cases 259, B.K. Holdings (P) Ltd. v. Prem Chand Jute Mills and others, reported in 1983 (53) Company Cases 367 and Naresh K. Aggarwala and Company v. Canbank Financial Services Limited and another, reported in (2010) 6 Supreme Court Cases 178, it was contended that if a warrant is construed to be marketable securities then any transfer of the same has to comply the provision contained in Securities Contracts Regulation Act. In none of the pleadings, the respondents ever took the plea that warrant is a marketable security and being covered by SCRA was enforceable by the Company Law Board.
Orissa High Court Cites 62 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1