Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.29 seconds)
M/S. Lipton India Ltd., G.T. Road, ... vs State Of Uttar Pradesh Through The ... on 24 May, 1995
cites
Section 44 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 26 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 200 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 397 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Dr. Z. Kotasek And Anr. vs State Of Bihar And Anr. on 4 May, 1983
In similar circumstances, in Dr. Z. Kotasek v. the State of Bihar (1984 Cri LJ 683) Patna High Court ruled that when the complainant was the Board itself and not any of its officers and the Board had passed a resolution for filing a complaint against the accused Company, there was complete compliance of the provisions of sanction as laid down in Section 49 of the Act. In the instant case before us, complainant is the Board and the Board has passed a resolution for filing a complaint. Thus, there is sufficient compliance of Section 49 of the Act.