Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 55 (0.33 seconds)Section 529A in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Recovery Of Debts Due To Banks And Financial Institutions Act, 1993
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Rajasthan Financial Corpn. & Anr vs The Official Liquidator & Anr on 5 October, 2005
58. It could thus be seen that when the order was passed by
the learned DRT on 31st of March, 2005, it was passed on the
application made on the same date. Though the representative of the
liquidator was present,it is clear that he was served with copy of the
application on the same day. In the application only valuation report
of M/s M. B. Sabnis & Co. was brought to the notice of the learned
Tribunal. The earlier valuation report of Mr. Shekhar Thite, the MOU
entered between Everest and Ashok Kumar Karnani dated 2nd April,
2003, the order of the learned Company Judge of this Court dated
were not brought to the notice of the learned DRT. In this background,
we will have to examine as to whether interference is warranted with
the impugned orders. It would be relevant to refer to the observations
of Their Lordships of the Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State
Financial Corporation & Anr. (supra) in para 17 and 18, which read as
48 / 78
::: Uploaded on - 28/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/08/2017 01:30:23 :::
WP. 2509-08
under:
Section 19 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 529 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Lica (P.) Ltd. (No. 1) vs Official Liquidator And Anr. on 4 January, 1993
15. The matter was again brought before this Court and in LICA (P)
Ltd. (2) v. Official Liquidator and the Court held:
Maharaja Chintamani Saran Nath Sahdeo vs State Of Bihar And Ors on 7 October, 1999
81. It would be relevant to refer to the following
observations of their Lordships of the Apex Court n the case of
Maharaja Chitamani Sarannath Shahdeo Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.1: