Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.21 seconds)
Reserve Bank Of India vs Bank Of Credit And Commerce ... on 27 February, 1992 cites

Shanti Prasad Jain vs The Director Of Enforcement on 19 April, 1962

In Shanti Prasad Jain's case [1963] 33 Comp Cas 231 (SC), the appellant, Shanti Prasad Jain, had made a claim for compensation against certain German firms in respect of machinery supplied by the German firms to the concern of Mr. Jain. As a result of settlement arrived at, certain amounts were deposited by the German firms with the Deutsche Bank in the account of Mr. Jain with the stipulation that the money was to be utilised by Mr. Jain only for the purpose of new machinery which may be purchased from the same firms after obtaining import licences from the Government of India. No. licences were obtained. In respect of the deposit of amount in the account of Mr. Shanti Prasad Jain in Deutsche Bank, Germany, as aforesaid, no permission was obtained from the Reserve Bank of India. The question before the apex court was as the whether the deposit in question evidenced the relationship of a borrower and a lender between the petitioner and the bank or as to whether the bank was merely a custodian or trustee of the said amount like a stakeholder. The question before the court was as to whether section 4(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, was attracted to such a transaction of "specific deposit" as contradistinguished from general deposit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 102 - Full Document

Velji Lakhamsey & Co. vs B.R. Banaji on 31 March, 1955

To some extent, the observations made in the Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Bombay in the case of Velji Lakhamsey and Co. v. Dr. B. R. Banaji [955] 25Comp Cas 395 appear to be inconsistent with the ratio of the three Supreme Court judgments referred to hereinabove. I must, therefore, hold that the observations made by Chagla C.J. in the abovereferred to case do not hold the field to the extent of their inconsistency with the observations and ration laid down in the Supreme Court judgments as aforesaid :
Bombay High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Official Liquidator vs N. Chandranarayanan on 21 September, 1972

29. Shri J. I. Mehta learned counsel for the applicant, also relied on the judgment of the High Court of Madras in Manasubha and Co. Pvt. Ltd., In re : Official Liquidator v. N. Chandranarayanan [1973] 43 Comp Cas 244. In this case, the applicant concerned had deposited certain amount with the company in liquidation for a specific purpose. After considering a large number of decided cases, the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras held that the agreement between the company and the applicant clearly created a trust and the applicant was entitled to preferential payment of the amount.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1   2 Next