Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Oct-30-1984
Reported in : 58CompCas162a(Kar); 1984(2)KarLJ433
..... did not take any action. as it turned out, the litigation persisted and is yet pending in the city civil court. it is in that circumstance they have moved this court under s. 155 of the act for rectification of the register of members. 5. the prayer is resisted by the respondent company solely on the ..... the change in the register of members will be subject to the final decree in o.s. no. 405 of 1980 on the file of the city civil court, bangalore. 26. i make no direction in regard to the past benefits respecting the shares transferred to the petitioners which may be settled in separate and ..... transfer in 1968 was unjustified and mala fide and, therefore, non est in law. (4) o.s. no. 405 of 1980 pending in the city civil court of bangalore is not a bar for registering the transfer in question. (5) respondent company is precluded from raising the question of qualification of petitioners to be ..... any, is with the petitioners and that lis is in issue in o.s. no. 405 of 1980 on the file of one of the city civil courts in bangalore. if he succeeds in the suit there, in so far as the 50 shares in question are concerned, he will be entitled to his ..... of the act. the respondent company which took the capricious stand in rejecting late manjunatha setty's application for transfer cannot now be permitted to even indirectly question the legality of the transfer merely because there is litigation pending before a civil court in regard to the estate of manjunatha setty. the civil court has made no .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Oct-26-1984
Reported in : AIR1985Ker134
..... over any area in the state, as was the position under clause 12 of the madras letters patent. this is also clear from the provisions of the kerala civil courts act, 1957. to put it differently, controversies like those connected with the interpretation of clauses 11 to 15 of the letters patent were not in the contemplation of the legislature. 12. ..... in which the interlocutory application was filed only in the exercise of the jurisdiction conferred by section 100 of the code of civil procedure. in hearing and disposing of the civil miscellaneous petition filed in the second appeal this court was acting in the exercise of its second appellate jurisdiction. the contention put forward by the appellant that the order sought to be appealed ..... of a first appeal. according to counsel, such an appeal would lie either under order 43 rule 1(k) of the code of civil procedure read with section 104 thereof, or under section 5(ii) of the kerala high court act, 1958. 2. section 104(1) of the code conceives of appeals against certain classes of orders, and one such order, under order ..... question was whether a further appeal would lie to a bench of two judges, under section 5(ii) of the kerala high court act, from the decision of a single judge disposing of a cma preferred under section 104 of the civil procedure a code; and the full bench answered the question in the negative. vedakkel j. who spoke for the bench referred .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Mar-22-1984
Reported in : AIR1984Ker149
..... section 11 the assignment was to be completed within two years. sections 12 to 14 dealt with the powers of the tribunals and the custodian, bar of jurisdiction of civil courts, and indemnity. section 15 contemplated the constitution of an 'agriculturists' welfare fund'. sections 16 and 17 conferred power on the government to remove difficulties and to make rules ..... among kudikidappukar's, landless agricultural labourersand small-holders. sep. 81 of the actexempted private forests from the ceiling provisions; and in this view, the object of the vesting act was to get atthe lands comprised in such forests alsofor distribution, as part of agrarian reform. the basic difference between thetwo schemes was while compensationwas payable for excess lands ..... the utility of the forest except with the previous permission of the district collector. section 6 empowered the government, by notification, to prohibit or regulate the doing of any act detrimental to preservation, and to regulate exercise of customary or prescriptive rights. the other provisions which dealt with institution of prosecutions, bar of suits, rule making power etc. ..... much extent of land comprised in private forests held by an owner under his personal cultivation as in within the ceiling limit applicable to him under the kerala land reforms act. 1963 (i of 1964) or any building or structure standing thereon or appurtenant thereto.explanation. -- for the purposes ofthis sub-section, 'cultivation' includescultivation of trees or .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-12-1984
Reported in : AIR1984Bom357; 1984MhLJ356
..... .c. the civil courts have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature. however, the suits cognisance of which is either expressly or impliedly barred by some other law are outside the purview of section 9 of the code. in that sense the courts under the bombay rent act are regarded as special courts executing courts are general courts. however, it is open to the legislature to ..... my opinion, there is no conflict at all between the provisions contained in section 41 of the presidency small cause courts act and section 28 of the bombay rent act on the one hand and the provisions contained in order xxi of the civil p.c. on the other. therefore, the question of resolving a conflict does not arise at all. in the face ..... .21. the legal position can be summarized as follows :under rule 101 read with rule 99 of order xxi of the civil p.c., all questions including the question of tenancy under the bombay rent act can be decided by the executing court, subject however to the conditions, as mentioned in rule 101 itself, that those questions must arise between the parties to ..... support of this petition is that in proceedings under r. 101 read with rule 99 of order xxi of the civil p.c., a question such as the tenancy of any person under the rent act cannot be decided by the executing court. similarly, as a result of the adjudication in these proceedings if it becomes necessary that possession should be given from .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-09-1984
Reported in : AIR1984All267
..... auction on june 2, 1971 as is revealed from the report of the court amin (ex. 1). no objection was filed by the judgment debtors and on july 3, 1971 the sale in execution was confirmed by the i additional civil judge, dehradun vide certified copy of the order (ex. 2). the ..... to the appellants suggests clearly that the repayment was conditional upon demand being made. the limitation is governed, therefore, under article 22 of the limitation act, 1963. the demand in this case having been made in july, 71 the petition was thus within limitation.17. in relation to items nos ..... firm might include the power to acknowledge the liability in the usual course in respect of a deposit accepted in banking transactions (sections 18/20, partnership act), lindley : law of partnership (14th ed) (1979) observes at page 381 that an acknowledgment by an agent being sufficient to affect his principal ..... no question to adjudge them as insolvents.4. shri radha krishna, learned counsel for the appellants, urged that the appellants have not committed any act of insolvency. the debts referred to by the respondent creditors are barred by limitation. in the alternative it is contended that the claim raised by ..... being satisfied. the respondents before the insolvency judge were found to be creditors and it was also found that the appellants had committed an act of insolvency inasmuch as the immovable properties had been sold in execution of a decree within three months immediately preceding the petition. respondent no. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
Decided on : Mar-16-1984
Reported in : AIR1999Mad312; (1999)IIMLJ398
..... 517 and krishnamma v. latchuma naidu, air 1958 ap 520 wherein it has been observed that there is nothing in the decision of the supreme court in mohamed amin's case, air 1952 sc 359 to indicate whether their lordships were referring to the future profits.' i.e., profits since the institution of ..... one final decree but. as pointed out in kasi v. ramanathan chettiar, : (1947)2mlj523 there is nothing in the civil procedure code which can be construed as a prohibition against the court in proper case, passing more than one preliminary decree and one final executable decree in a suit. the relevant provisions of the ..... does not insist on a preliminary decree containing all the directions referred to in rule 12. there is no express or implied prohibition in the civil procedure code against awarding possession and directing an enquiry into future mesne profits by successive adjudication in a pending suit though the normal and ordinary procedure would be ..... plaint was held to be no bar to the award of such profits in the final decree. the principle of this decision was accepted and acted upon by mack j., in abdul rahim saheb v. abdul salam, air 1949 mad. 743 and by a division bench of which one of ..... enquiry and pass a final decree awarding such profits without the necessity of filing an application within the period prescribed by articles 181 of the limitation act. this is the effect of the decision in ramasubramanya pattar v. karimbal pati, ilr 1940 mad. 372 and the madras amendment of order 20 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-19-1984
..... intra-enterprise conspiracy doctrine, it has never explored or analyzed in detail the justifications for such a rule; the doctrine has played only a relatively minor role in the court's sherman act holdings. iii petitioners, joined by the united states as amicus curiae, urge us to repudiate the intra-enterprise conspiracy doctrine. [ footnote 12 ] the central criticism is ..... labeled a "contract," a "conspiracy," or merely a policy decision, because it surely does not unreasonably restrain competition within the meaning of the sherman act. the rule of reason has always given the courts adequate latitude to examine the substance, rather than the form, of an arrangement when answering the question whether collective action has restrained competition within the meaning ..... restrain trade could be so labeled." 341 u.s. at 341 u. s. 598 . [ footnote 2/6 ] "there remains for consideration only the court of appeals' alternative holding that the sherman act claim should be dismissed because respondents were all part of a single business entity, and were therefore entitled to cooperate without creating an illegal conspiracy. but since ..... s. 141 -142. [ footnote 2/7 ] also pertinent is united states v. citizens & southern national bank, 422 u. s. 86 (1975), in which the court wrote: "the central message of the sherman act is that a business entity must find new customers and higher profits through internal expansion -- that is, by competing successfully, rather than by arranging treaties with its .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jul-05-1984
..... identification. the registrant is under a continuing duty to notify selective service of changes in these data. [ footnote 3/2 ] oversight hearing on selective service prosecutions before the subcommittee on courts, civil liberties, and the administration of justice of the house committee on the judiciary, 97th cong., 2d sess., 10 (1982) (hereinafter oversight hearing) (statement of director of selective service ..... school district v. rodriguez, 411 u. s. 1 , 411 u. s. 98 -99 (1973) (marshall, j., dissenting). as a majority of the court has noted, "the courts are called upon to decide whether congress, acting under an explicit constitutional grant of authority, has by that action transgressed an explicit guarantee of individual rights which limits the authority so conferred," and ..... v. missouri, supra, at 71 u. s. 327 . in both cummings and garland, the persons in the group disqualified were defined entirely by irreversible acts committed by them. the district court in this case viewed 12(f) as comparable to the provisions of the reconstruction laws declared unconstitutional in cummings and garland, because it thought the statute singled ..... ineluctably designated by the legislature" for punishment, id. at 367 u. s. 87 , the act may be an attainder. see cummings v. missouri, 4 wall. 277, 71 u. s. 324 (1867). in cummings, the court struck down a provision of the missouri post-civil war reconstruction constitution that page 468 u. s. 848 barred persons from various professions unless they .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-12-1984
..... ), 29 u.s.c. 482(a), and new officers would have replaced the incumbents. moreover, the expertise of the secretary in supervising elections was completely ignored. not only did the court acting alone decide that a new election was required, but its order established procedures for that election and appointed outside arbitrators to supervise their implementation. this action by the district ..... , 86th cong., 1st sess., 16-17 (1959) ("a member of a labor organization who is aggrieved by any violation of these provisions . . . may bring a civil action against such labor organization in the u.s. district court for the district in which the principal office of such labor organization is located. such action may be for the purpose of preventing and restraining ..... (1959) (hereafter h.r.conf.rep. no. 1147). in relevant part, therefore, 102 of the act now provides: "any person whose rights secured by the provisions of this title have been infringed by any violation of this title may bring a civil action in a district court of the united states for such relief (including injunctions) as may be appropriate." 73 stat. 523 ..... enjoined the union to do exactly that, exercising its authority under 102 of the act, which provides in pertinent part: "any person whose rights secured by the provisions of this subchapter have been infringed by any violation of this subchapter may bring a civil action in a district court of the united states for such relief (including injunctions) as may be appropriate. " 29 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-01-1984
..... held that the timely filing of an employment discrimination charge with the equal employment opportunity commission ( eeoc) is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to a suit under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 against a private employer. the time limit on the filing of a charge is therefore subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling. in so holding, we settled ..... considerations of sovereign immunity made the principles underlying zipes inapplicable when the defendant is the federal government. the position of the seventh circuit directly conflicts with that of three other courts of appeals. see martinez v. orr, 738 f.2d 1107 (ca10 1984); milam v. united states postal service, 674 f.2d 860 (ca11 1982); saltz v. lehman, 217 u.s ..... .s. 898 , 899 after being fired by respondent, petitioner filed a complaint with the eeoc alleging racial discrimination. the commission denied relief, and petitioner then filed suit in federal district court. under 42 u.s.c . 2000e-16(c), the complaint was due within 30 days of petitioner's receipt of notice of the eeoc's final action. the district ..... appeals affirmed, stating that "the time limits for filing title vii actions against the federal government are jurisdictional." app. to pet. for cert. 2. the court relied on sims v. heckler, 725 f.2d 1143 (ca7 1984), which held that a federal employee's failure to file a timely administrative charge barred a later suit. sims .....Tag this Judgment!