Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (1.02 seconds)
Nagavarapu Krishna Prasad And Anr. vs Andhra Bank Ltd. on 19 March, 1982 cites

Mohanlal Dhanjibhai Mehta vs Chunilal B. Mehta And Ors. on 5 July, 1961

31. In that case, the question was whether it was intra vires of the company to enter into a particular transaction and it was observed having regard to the independent objects clause and clause 30 of the memorandum which dealt with multitude of object and powers that the transaction was intra vires. We are unable to find anything in the judgment which supports the contention that, if there are a number of objects mentioned in the memorandum of association, and there is an independent objects clause, that circumstance precludes the court from holding that one or other of its objects is the main object. While we agree with the ultimate conclusion in the decision in Mohanlal Dhanjibhai Mehta v. Chunilal B. Mehta [1962] 32 Comp Cas 970 (Guj), with great respect, we are unable to agree with the proposition laid down that when there is an independent objects clause, there is no main or primary object or to put it differently all the objects set out in the memorandum are main or primary objects.
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 10 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document
1   2 3 Next