Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.22 seconds)Section 24 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 24 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Section 419 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 61 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Jitendra Singh vs Bhanu Kumari & Ors on 11 April, 2008
The
learned senior counsel appearing for the High Court
Administration relied upon another decision in the case
of Jitendra Singh v. Bhanu Kumari5. In Paragraph 9 of the
said decision, the Apex Court held thus:--
Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
In Re Vivekananada Nidhi And Others vs Smt. Ashima Goswami on 7 February, 1997
"49. Independently of the proviso to the said Rule, as we
have held earlier, there is a plenary power vesting in the
Hon'ble the Chief Justice to withdraw a matter pending
before a Bench and transfer it to an another Bench. The
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) Nos.1001 & 1014 of 2025 20
case before the Apex Court was of a regular transfer
application moved before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice by a
party to the proceedings by invoking Clause 14 of the 1948
Order which was objected by the Respondent. At this stage,
it will be necessary to make a reference to another decision
of the Apex Court in the case of Vivekanand
Nidhi v. Asheema Goswami (Smt.)4. In the said case, the Apex
Court accepted the submission made before it that if an
order was passed suo motu by the learned District Judge in
exercise of powers under Section 24 of the said Code, there
was no occasion to issue a notice to the Respondent.