Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.26 seconds)

Mineria Nacional Limitada And Anr. vs Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. ... on 4 October, 2006

4. The learned Division Bench in Bais Surgical & Medical Institute Put. Ltd. and Ors. v. Dhananjay Pande and Ors. (supra) had referred to Stridewell Leather (P) Ltd. and Ors. v. Bhankerpur Simbhaoli Beverages (P) Ltd. (supra) and observed that the main question that had arisen in that case was not about the strength of the Bench but was about the territory (sic. territorial) jurisdiction and that the Hon'ble Apex Court had held that the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the registered Office of the Company was situated was the Court which had jurisdiction and not the place within whose jurisdiction the Company Law Board (CLB) or its Bench was located. At the same time, the learned Division Bench observed that the question as to the Bench strength was also addressed, discussed and the Lordships of the Apex Court had pointed out even on this point, and, these observations were contained in para 13 and the dictum was that the jurisdiction to hear and decide the appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act shall lie before the Division Bench.
Bombay High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Brij Mohan Bansal vs Company Law Board And Others on 30 November, 2017

He further relies on judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Shanta Genevience Pommerat & Anr. Vs. Sakal Paper Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ; (AIR 1983 SC 269) to show 5 that the provisions of Sections 397, 398 and 403 of the Companies Act are infact an alternate to winding up. He also relies on judgment of Supreme Court reported in [2005] 128 Company Cases 273 (Bom) 1985; Dr. Bais Surgical and Medical Institute Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Dhananjay Pande and Others and 1985; Calcutta Chemical Co. Ltd. Vs. Krishna Das Pal & Ors. Page 503. The merit of the judgment shall be discussed henceforth.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shree Ram Urban vs Shri R.K.Dhall & Others on 11 September, 2009

lived and almost ex-parte and adhoc arrangement is passed, the challenge ought to be based on such ground that the order could be seen to be such that by no stretch ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:04:00 ::: 19 of interpretation of pleadings such order could be wholly sustained. Mr.Bookwalla relying on the said decision has further submitted that no prejudice whatsoever is seen to have been caused to the appellant due to the impugned order and, therefore, it would be proper to leave the parties to avail of the option of approaching the Company Law Board and on completing their pleadings to move the Company Law Board for disposal of the application for interim relief.
1