Corporate Law Judgements

Displaying 10 - 20 of 221 in 23 pages

Extension of date of supply or reduction of quantity does not amount to novation of contract

 20 August 2012

The facts in brief needs to be stated for answering the issues raised. They are: In the case of Purbanchal Cables (C.A. No. 2348 of 2003), the supplier is the manufacturer of Aluminium Conductors Steel Reinforced (for short “ACSR”) for various specif

Posted in Corporate Law 1 comments |   1457 hits


Terms and condition of memorandum of settlement is to be bound on all the party under section 391 and 394 of Companies Act

 19 July 2012

In sequel to orders passed by this Court with the earnest efforts of Mediators, namely, Mr. J.S. Bhogal, Senior Advocate and Mr. Pawan Thakur, Advocate, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The parties have jointly placed on reco

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   959 hits


In Pension Scheme several parameters for existing members are to be consider for determining amount of pension

 11 July 2012

In the Pension Scheme, several parameters for existing members, like date of birth of member in service and on calculating the age as on 15.11.1995 for categorizing them in groups are provided which was also considered from the date of joining of his

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1226 hits


As per sec 14 and 15 the arbitration clause if clearly spelt out the prohibition the cannot intervene and pressurise the parties to settle with substitute arbitrator

 25 June 2012

The petitioner submits that both Shri N.A. Palkhivala and Shri D.S. Seth are no more and therefore the arbitration clause in the agreement does not survive. It was pointed out that Shri N.A. Palkhivala was named in the agreement since he was the Chai

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1156 hits


Scheme of Amalgamation should fulfilled the condition of sec 391 to 394 of the Companies Act 1956

 19 June 2012

Company Petition No.95 of 2004 was a petition under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) vide which sanction of this Court to the scheme of Amalgamation of Indrama Investment Private Limited (transfer

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   3346 hits


Arbitration agreement on the death of the named arbitrator :

 14 June 2012

Facts - The petitioner by way of Agreement transferred land to the respondent - the Collector, Porbander , Revenue Department, State of Gujarat said lands were transferred to the respondent without prior permission of the Collector and as such the p

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1039 hits


Execution proceding cannot be taken out against a shell company having no asset.

 13 June 2012

The Arbitrator commenced proceedings and a statement of claim was filed on behalf of the respondent. The appellant filed its defence statement-cum-counter claim and, the case was listed for admission / denial of documents on 30.04.2003. The appellant

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1211 hits


Termination of the agreement depends upon the clause mention in the agreement entered into by the parties

 24 May 2012

The petitioner had entered into an agreement dated 28.02.2000 titled “Petrol / HSD Pump Dealer Agreement for Corporation Owned / Leased Pumps” with the respondent No.1 IOC, where under the respondent No.1 IOC had appointed the petitioner as its deale

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   3606 hits


Sec 25 Company is governed by its MOA and AOA and I case of any alteration it should take approval from authority before such alteration

 23 May 2012

The disputes in the present case centre around the election to Sports Working Committee of the Delhi District and Cricket Association (DDCA). Sports Working Committee is a smaller body within the DDCA‟s Executive Committee.

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1663 hits


In the absence of proper ground delay cannot be condone with the AAIFR

 15 May 2012

It is the say of the petitioner that they applied for a certified copy of the order on the same date, which was received on 12.11.2010 but filed the appeal on 31.1.2011. Thus, it is not in dispute that the appeal is barred by time and is even beyond

Posted in Corporate Law |    0 comments |   1501 hits










×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

web analytics