Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.44 seconds)Section 31 in The Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 16 in The Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 2013
Solidaire India Ltd vs Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. And ... on 7 February, 2001
15. Reliance was placed on the decision of Solidaire India Ltd. vs
Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. and Ors. reported in (2001) 3 SCC
71, in support of the contention that when there were two special
statutes, the provisions of both should be harmoniously construed.
According to Mr. Mitra, the provisions of the IBC were not in conflict with
the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the
2013 Act) and Rule 30(9) of the said Rules, including the provisos thereto.
There was no inconsistency. Thus, the provision of Section 238 of the IBC
was wrongly pressed into service by the Regional Director and the learned
Single Judge erroneously upheld such decision which was contrary to law.
Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 January, 2014
16. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hardeep Singh vs. State of
Punjab and Ors. reported in (2014) 3 SCC 92, on the proposition that,
when the language of the statute was plain and unambiguous, the court
should give effect to the same and not go behind the express language, so
as to add or subtract any word therefrom. The legislature should be
presumed to have used the words deliberately and consciously for
carrying out the purpose of the statute.
Indus Biotech Private Limited vs Kotak India Venture (Offshore) Fund ... on 26 March, 2021
Indus Biotech Private Limited vs Kotak India Venture
(Offshore) Fund (Earlier Known as Kotak India Venture Limited) and
Ors. reported in (2021) 6 SCC 436, was relied upon in support of the
contention that, the proceedings pending before the NCLAT were
proceedings in rem, and rights had been created in favour of creditors of
the corporate debtor. It would have an erga omnes effect. Mr. Mitra prayed
for setting aside of the order of the learned Single Judge and the order of
the Regional Director.