Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.19 seconds)
G.Rajasuria vs Meyer And Another] Is Not Applicable To ... cites

Turner Morrison And Co., Ltd vs Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd on 9 March, 1972

- The defendants 3 to 6 are having nothing to do with the liabilities of D2. Even though D3 might be a subsidiary of D2, the assets of D3 to D6 are in India and it is their own properties and in such a case, the doctrine of lifting the wheel cannot be pressed into service and as per the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta Court reported in AIR 1969 CALCUTTA 238 [Turner Morrison & Co.., Ltd. v. Hungerford Investment Trust Ltd.], identity of subsidiary companies should not be ignored.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 61 - K S Hegde - Full Document

Bacha F. Guzdar vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay on 28 October, 1954

56. The one other decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1955 SC 74(1) (Mrs.Bacha F.Guzdar Bombay vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay) which also is not germane for deciding this case. It is concerning the shareholder's right in participating in the proceedings and at the time of considering the application for impleading the parties, this would be considered on merits.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 349 - M C Mahajan - Full Document
1