Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: acceptance Page 1 of about 448,864 results (0.026 seconds)

Dec 12 1985 (HC)

Kanta Mehta Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Reported in : [1987]62CompCas769(Delhi)

..... a field, forbidden to legislature, but in this examination, it necessarily must give the greatest deference to the legislature in instances of economic regulation because courts accept the reality that they lack the 4expertise and means to inform itself fully about the peculiarities necessitating the immediate need of particular social legislation, and unless it ..... which is essentially for the legislators to determine, because the judicial deference to legislature in instances of economic regulation is a well established principle born out of the acceptance of reality that courts, lacking the capacity to inform themselves fully, about the peculiarities of a particular local situation, should hesitate to dub the legislative classification as ..... ensure the implementation of credit policy objectives of providing credit to neglected sectors at reasonable rates and restricting its availability for less essential purposes. but it also accepted that the regulation in the form of detailed administrative supervision and periodical inspection would pose certain problems in designing the organisation for control because of the very ..... act by the banking laws (miscellaneous provisions) act, 1965. powers were conferred on the reserve bank of india to issue suitable directions to regulate and monitor the deposit acceptance activities of these companies and corporate bodies. 18. section 45-i(c) defined financial institutions to mean any non- banking institution which carries on its business, namely .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 2006 (HC)

Jorhat Tea and Industries (P.) Ltd. Vs. State of Meghalaya

Court : Guwahati

..... deposits shall be made by the company within 30 days from the date of acceptance of such deposits or within such further time, not exceeding 30 days, as the central government may on sufficient cause being shown by the company allow. ..... be repaid in accordance with the terms and conditions of such deposits.16. further sub-section (4) and section 58a provides that wherein a deposit is accepted by a company after the commencement of the companies (amendment) act, 1974, in contravention of the rules made under sub-section (1), revocation of such ..... thereof and any interest thereupon in accordance with the terms and conditions of such deposits.14. sub-section (3) of section 58a deals with the deposit accepted by a company at any time before the commencement of the companies (amendment) act, 1974.15. sub-section (3a) which has been incorporated by ..... in consultation with the rbi to prescribe the limits upto which, the manner in which and the conditions subject to which deposits may be invited or accepted by a company either from the public or from its members. sub-section (2) of section 58 lays down that no company shall invite ..... of receipt. according to the petitioner the amounts in question were not 'deposits' under rule 2(b)(ix) and 2(b)(vi) of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975 and section 58a of the companies act, 1956 and thus, the company was not required to file any return of deposits and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 1993 (SC)

M/S. Shriram Chits and Investment (P.) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Oth ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1993SC2063; [1994]79CompCas298(SC); (1994)2CompLJ430(SC); JT1993(4)SC399; 1993(3)SCALE125; 1993Supp(4)SCC226; [1993]Supp1SCR54

..... the funds of the subscribing public. in this context it will be noticed that the banks, financial institutions and non-banking financial institutions, who accept deposits or deal with moneys of the public are disciplined and regulated by the various legislations. banking regulations act, 1949 is applicable to commercial ..... is no necessity for chit fund institutions to borrow from the public by way of deposits and as such they may be prohibited from accepting deposits except as advance payment of subscription or deposits from prized subscribers by way of security towards payment of their future instalments.the views ..... for further tightening up the provisions so as to ensure that the activities of such companies, in so far as they pertain to the acceptance of deposits, investments, lending operations etc., subserve the national interest and serve more effectively as an adjunct to the regulation of the monetary and ..... in many cases large and they are usually scattered over many places.some foremen, in addition to carrying on the business of chits, also accept deposits from third parties. these are utilised as working funds and lent at high rates of interest to subscribers and perhaps to others. according ..... in which prize winning tickets are determined both by lots and by auction.the prize winner can get the prize only on furnishing security acceptable to the foreman for the payment of the remaining instalments. in the event of default by subscribers in payment of instalment on clue dates .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1988 (HC)

Jagjivan Hiralal Doshi and Others Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1989]65CompCas553(Bom)

..... a close scrutiny of the books of accounts. the probabilities leave no doubt that the petitioners knew that the deposits exceeded the permissible limit and that they should not have accepted or renewed the deposits. the judgment in trisure india ltd. , does not assist the petitioners at all.18. this is not to suggest that none of the petitioners herein ..... which is prohibitory in its tenor and, therefore, demands strict compliance.10. does the law make any distinction between full-time directors and directors who lend their special skills by accepting membership of the board of directors? the answer is provided by certain provisions of the act. let me consider them.11. 'officer', the word used in section 633, includes 'any ..... board of directors, certain provisions of the companies act which highlight the responsibility of directors need to be borne in mind. section 58a enacts very stringent provisions in regard to acceptance of deposits. for example, advertisements inviting deposits, disclosure of the financial position of the company, application of the rules even to renewal of deposits highlight the intention to protect the ..... :(i) the company is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of dyes, intermediates and chemicals. the company supplies the products mainly to the textile industry.(ii) the total of the acceptances of new deposits during july 1983, and october, 1983, was for rs. 2,94,000 in excess of the permissible limit. the total of renewals of old deposits between july .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1983 (SC)

Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uo ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1983SC937; [1983]54CompCas674(SC); (1983)2CompLJ281(SC); 1983(2)SCALE16; (1983)4SCC166; [1983]3SCR438

..... sensitive field of exploitation of the weaker section. section 58a amongst various other things was designed to introduce some measure of control over the non-banking companies inviting and accepting deposits in the ultimate interest of the depositors, and by compelling limited liquidity in resources, the society at large was sought to be protected from the ever haunting ..... of various other provisions devised to extend protection to depositors and investors it does play a small but effective part whereby liquid finance would be available to the company accepting deposits for meeting its obligation of repaying the deposits maturing during the year. therefore, there is no merit in the submission.31. it was next contended that rule ..... not effectively protect the depositors if that was the underlying intendment. even prior to introduction of section 58a, the reserve bank of india was empowered to regulate the acceptance and repayment of deposits by the non-banking companies. the legislature having become aware that the regulatory measures introduced by the reserve bank of india have not effectively protected ..... (amendment act, 1974, in contravention of the rules made under sub-section (1), repayment of such deposit shall be made by the company within thirty days from the date of acceptance of such deposit or within such further time, not exceeding thirty days, as the central government may, on sufficient cause being shown by the company, allow.. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .(7) (a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 1990 (HC)

Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [1990]69CompCas339(Ker)

..... is called for. the interpretation canvassed by the respondent will, according to me, detract from the utility of section 58a as an effective check on the acceptance of deposits by companies. 14. in the circumstances, i do not find any justification for the respondent's contention that the latest audited balance-sheet ..... filed every year is to ensure proper control and check on such activities of companies and to shield the investors from possible frauds. reckless and excessive acceptance of deposits is controlled by the ceiling prescribed in rule 3, and relating it to the paid-up share capital and free reserves. since the ..... of the check, as warranted by the circumstances prevailing from time to time. it is in this background that rule 3, limiting the deposits to be accepted by a company to 10 % of the aggregate of its paid-up share capital and free reserves, computed in the manner provided in the explanation, was ..... december 31, 1983. 5. in doing so, the petitioner followed the same practice which they had adopted in previous years for which their returns had been accepted. it is true that in two prior years, in relation to the returns as on march 31, 1980, and march 31, 1981, the respondent had ..... view that, having regard to the purpose and the scheme of section 58a and of the rules, the petitioner's contention has to be accepted. section 58a empowered the central government to prescribe the limits up to which, the manner in which and the conditions subject to which, deposits may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 2001 (HC)

Bharat Plywood and Timber Pdroducts (P) Ltd. Vs. Registrar of Companie ...

Court : Kerala

Reported in : [2002]108CompCas601(Ker)

..... barred under s. 300 cr. p.c.13. another ground taken up in the petition is that the findings of the courts below that the company accepted deposits in violation of s. 58a of the act is not supported by evidence on record. according to the petitioners the evidence is not sufficient to prove ..... case the evidence in the first case would have supported the conviction for the offence charged in the second case. one of the earlier prosecutions was for acceptance of deposits in violation of r. 4a of the rules. it was necessary as per r. 4a for every company intending to invite or allowing or ..... from the date of acceptance of such deposits. in the complaint filed earlier by the first respondent in which the allegation was that the company contravened the provision in r. 3a ..... the appellate court agreed with the trial court in its finding on the above question.7. the allegation in the present complaint is that the company accepted deposits in excess of the limit prescribed and that they failed to make repayment of the deposits in contravention of the provisions of law within 30 days ..... s. 300 cr. p.c. for the reason that the same persons had already been tried for the offence punishable under r. 11 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975 for violation of r. 3a and r. 4a of the said rules arises for consideration in the revision.2. the first petitioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1991 (HC)

S.P. Punj and Others Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court : Delhi

Reported in : [1991]71CompCas509(Delhi)

..... petitioners are relieved from the alleged liabilities for non-filing of returns by m/s punj sons pvt. ltd., under rule 10 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975, read with section 58a of the companies act, 1956, and also from the consequence of the alleged defaults for which the ..... the grounds that the petitioners never participated or were parties to any resolution of the company, thereby allowing the company to make borrowings or to accept deposits within the scope of rule 2 of the rules; that the petitioners were never in control or the management of the affairs of the ..... the contravention/offence under rule 11 of the rules is a continuing offence or not. 20. for my benefit, rules 10 and 11 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975 are reproduced as under- '10 return if deposits to be filed with the registrar - every company to which these rules ..... is actually initiated, only the court before which the complaint or trial is going on can grant relief. the preliminary objection has, thereforee, to be accepted.' 15. i am in respectful agreement with the view expressed above. 16. it may, however, be pointed out that this view is only with ..... act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the act'), for being relieved from prosecution for their alleged liability for non-filing of returns under rule 10 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975, hereinafter called 'the rules'. 2. briefly the facts, as stated in the petition, are that m/s punjsons private limited, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 1993 (SC)

Ferro Alloys Corpn. Ltd. Vs. A.P. State Electricity Board and Another

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1993SC2005; JT1993(3)SC82; 1993(2)SCALE593; 1993Supp(4)SCC136; [1993]3SCR199

..... justice and isolated instances of unintended injury are inevitable martyrs for the common good since god himself has failed to make perfect laws and perfect justice. freaks have to be accepted by the victims rightly or wrongly as forensic fatein fatehchand himmatlal v. state of maharashtra : [1977]2scr828 it was observed:maybe, some stray money-lenders may be good ..... carry interest in every transaction. secondly, the nature and character of the security deposit is essentially different from fixed deposit. it is worthwhile, in this connection, to refer to companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975. in rule 2 it is stated:2. definitions.- in these rules, unless the context otherwise requires.-(a)---(b) 'deposit' means any deposit of money with, ..... upon such terms and conditions as the board thinks fit. in exercise of this power the board had initially introduced the condition regarding security and each of the petitioners had accepted the term.(emphasis supplied)95. where, therefore, under section 49 read with section 79(j) regulations are made, the validity of the regulations could be examined by the court ..... of interest payable on fixed deposit because the nature and character of a security deposit is basically different from a fixed deposit. this is clearly brought out by the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975. the said rules expressly exempt security deposit in definition of rule 2, clause (v) & (vi). in jagdamba paper industries case (supra), the rate of interest .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 1981 (HC)

Hyderabad Vanaspathi Ltd. and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1986]59CompCas654(AP)

..... . the question that arised for consideration in this criminal revision case is, whether the non-filing of a return of deposits by the companies under rule 10 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975, is a continuing offence punishable under rule 11 of the said rules. 2. the registrar of companies, andhra pradesh, hyderabad, filed a complaint before the special ..... directors of the first accused company, have failed to file with him before june 30, 1979. a return of deposits for the year 1978 under rule 10 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975 (hereinafter called 'the deposit rules'), and, therefore, they rendered themselves liable for punishment under rule 11 of the said rules. 3. the accused contended that the ..... of deposited is mentioned in the return, the return for the next year cannot be submitted. clause (i) of sub-rule (2) of rule 3 directs that no company shall accept any deposit against unsecurred debenture or any deposit from a shareholder or any deposit guaranteed by any person who, at the time of giving such guarantee is a director of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //