Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.20 seconds)Section 16 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 3 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Real Value Appliances Ltd. Etc., ... vs Canara Bank & Ors. Etc., Vardhman ... on 5 May, 1998
17. Again in the case of Rishab Agro Industries Ltd. v. P.N.B. Capital Services Ltd. [2000] 101 Comp Cas 284
: AIR 2000 SC 1583, the judgment in the case of Real Value Appliances Ltd. v. Canara Bank , was relied upon. In para. 9, it is stated (page 292):
Gram Panchayat And Anr vs Shree Vallabh Glass Works Limited And ... on 15 March, 1990
14. There has been consistent view of the Supreme Court in this regard and 14 reference has been made to a judgment in the case of Gram Panchayat v. Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. . This was a case where dues were sought to be recovered by the Gram Panchayat from a sick company. As in the present case, the company before the Supreme Court, i.e., M/s. Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. was declared to be a sick industrial company within the meaning of Clause (o) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. The Gram Panchayat initiated coercive proceedings under Section 129 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act to recover a sum of Rs. 9,47,539 stated to be the property tax and other amounts due from the company. The company approached the High Court, claiming protection under Section 22 of the Act. The High Court accepted the writ petition and destrained the petitioners from recovering the said amount without the consent of the Board and the matter landed in the Supreme Court. In paragraphs 7, 8 and 10, the Supreme Court laid down (page 172):