Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.29 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Seethai Mills Ltd. vs N. Perumalsamy And Anr. on 10 August, 1979
In Seethai Mills Ltd. Vs. N. Perumalsamy and Another, the Division Bench of the Madras High Court has held as under :-
Intesa Sanpaolo S.P.A vs Videocon Industries Limited on 5 December, 2013
(b) In 2014 183 CC 395 (Bom) (Intesa Sanpaolo SPA Vs. Videocon Industries Limited), it is held as under:-
M/S Iba Health(I) P.Ltd vs M/S Info-Drive Systems Sdn.Bhd on 23 September, 2010
63. It is no doubt true that the court will keep in mind the commercial solvency of a Company, larger public interest and repercussions of the order of admission. The commercial solvency, however, cannot be a stand alone ground. If that be so, then every Company which is commercially solvent will refuse to pay the admitted debts and then take up the ground of commercial solvency. The Apex Court in the case IBA Health (I) (P) Limited Vs. Info Drive Systems Sdn.Bhd, MANU/SC/0772/2010: 2010-10-SCC-553, has clearly laid down in the passage reproduced below that the commercial solvency cannot be considered as a stand alone ground:-
Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd vs M. W. Pradhan on 21 March, 1966
In the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in AIR 1966 SC 1707 (Harinagar Sugar Mills Limited Vs. M.W.Pradhan) relied on by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, it is held as under:-
Section 434 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 13 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Sarkar Estates (Private) Ltd. vs Kusumika Iron Works (Private) Ltd. And ... on 30 November, 1960
(a) In AIR 1961 Cal 439 (Sarkar Estates (P) Limited Vs. Kusumika Iron Works (P) Limited and others), it is held as under:-