Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: companies act 1956 section 3 Page 30 of about 1,429,041 results (1.733 seconds)

Jan 31 2001 (HC)

National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2001IIIAD(Delhi)887; 90(2001)DLT754; 2001(58)DRJ799

..... . it being a multi-unit cooperative society it is deemed to be registered as a cooperative society under the multi state co-operative societies act, 1984 in view of section 3(g) of this act. the second schedule of this act contains a list of national level co-operative societies. the name of petitioner figures at item no.4 in this list. it has its ..... india : [1987]1scr819 reiterate the same position. it follows from this that name does not matter. the fact that an authority is a company registered under the companies act or under the societies registration act or a state cooperative societies act, alone will not be determinative. each case will turn on its own peculiar facts. what normally matters is the facts surrounding the constitution, functioning ..... , normally, cannot be termed as a 'state' or other authority within the meaning of article 12 of the constitution. the learned counsel for the respondent strongly relied on ahmad and company (supra). in our view this judgment does not advance the case of the respondents. this judgment only reiterates the contention of the appellant as elaborated in the case of sri ..... judge recorded the contention of both the parties and also observed that the respondents herein had relied upon the judgment of madras high court in the case of ahmad and company, madras and others versus union of india : air1982mad247 wherein court held nafed to be a 'state' and the appellant had relied upon the division bench judgment of this court in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1984 (HC)

Hind Syntex Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : 1988(15)ECC238; 1987(12)LC1028(MP); 1985(19)ELT35(MP)

..... p.d. mulye, j.1. the petitioner m/s. hind syntex ltd., which is a company duly registered under the companies act, 1956, which has a factory in village bibrod, district dewas, where they are engaged in the manufacture of manmade yarns with different blends such as cellulosic spun fibre and non-cellulosic ..... interpreting a taxing statute one should bear in mind that it is to be construed strictly according to the plain words used therein. section 3 of the act, which is reproduced below, is quite clear on this point, as stated above :-'section 3. duties specified in the first schedule to be levied.-(1) there shall be levied and collected in such manner as may be ..... , left to be prescribed by rules. this is the effect of the words 'there shall be levied and collected in such manner as may be prescribed' as they occur in section 3.17. however, the learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon a number of decisions submitted that though the petitioners had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under ..... to pay a tax or duty on account of particular goods or property.15. section 3, which is included in chapter ii of the said act, relate to levy and collection of duty, under the heading 'duties specified in the first schedule to be levied'. sub-section (3) of the said section provides that different tariff values any be fixed : (a) for different classes or descriptions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2010 (HC)

Obulapuram Mining Company Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by Its Director, Sri B.V. Sri ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2010(2)ALT672

..... to the said i.a. no. 2/2009 and no arguments were advanced on the issue of impleadment of central empowered committee in this boundary dispute matter between two private companies.(iii) the central empowered committee having issued the notice of hearing asking the officials of the government of a.p., as well as counsel for the applicant in i.a. no ..... , the clearance under environment (protection) act and the clearance under pollution (control) act and it had made all necessary applications for grant of necessary clearance under the pollution (control ..... -company has the approval for production of four million tons of iron ore per annum from lease no. 1; 1 million ton of iron ore per annum from lease no. 2, and 1.2 million tons of iron ore per annum from lease no. 3. further, it is having all the statutory clearances including the clearance under section 2 of the forest (conservation) act ..... acts, has granted the mining leases in favour of the writ petitioner company and thus, the writ petitioner-company is a holder of statutory leases granted under the statute. it is the state government which fixed the boundaries of the leases and it is the state government which delivered the possession of leasehold areas. in this regard, letter of state government dated 17.3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 2004 (HC)

Sudhir Goel Vs. M.C.D.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2005Delhi7; 112(2004)DLT249; 2004(75)DRJ195

..... any agreement or covenant. now, thereforee, i, y.d. bankata, additional commissioner, municipal corporation of delhi, in exercise of powers delegated to me by the commissioner under section 491 of the delhi municipal corporation act, 1957 (66 of 1957), hereby order to cancel the allotment/license in respect of shop no.9 meena bazar, red fort complex, delhi-110006 with immediate effect ..... action. this document reads thus:'municipal corporation of delhim.c. pry school bldg.more sarai: delhi court of estate officernotice under sub-sections 4, 5 & 7 of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, dated: 3.4.2003sh. ramesh kumar whereas, i the undersigned, am of the opinion on the basis of grounds specified in the plaint ..... bazar), delhi is owned by the petitioner/mcd which is a public premises within meaning of section 2 of the public premises (eviction of unauthorisedunauthorised occupants) act, 1971.2. that the said shop was allotted to the respondent on the basis of monthly license fee/rent.3. the hon'ble high court of delhi in cwp no.3313/99 titled as society for ..... that you are in unauthorised occupation of the public premises mentioned in the schedule below and that you should be evicted from the said premises:-grounds: unauthorised occupation:- now, thereforee, in pursuance of sub-sections 4, 5 & 7 of the act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2000 (HC)

Shri Arjun Tukaram Shetgaonkar and Others Vs. Smt. Urmila Vaikunth Des ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(4)BomCR406; 2000(3)MhLj830

..... the legal representatives of a deceased member whose name is still on the register of members are entitled to file a petition under sections 397 and 398 of the companies act, 1956 has held that the view taken by the high court of delhi to the effect that the legal representatives of the deceased ..... deceased plaintiff was the holder of 50% shareholding in the petitioner no. 3 company prior to the resolution under challenge in the suit.6. the apex court in life insurance case (supra) while considering the various provisions of the companies act, 1956 in relation to the rights of the shareholder has clearly held that the ..... sue in such suit does not survive on the death of the plaintiff who had filed the suit in her capacity as the director of the company.3. the contention of shri s. usgaonkar, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners is that the cause of action to institute the suit by ..... case in hand undisputedly, prior to the alleged resolution, the deceased plaintiff had 50% shareholding in the share capital of the petitioner no. 3 company. on the death of the original plaintiff, the said share holding became the part of the estate left behind by the deceased plaintiff. ..... consequent to the death of the deceased plaintiff that the respondents have acquired the right by inheritance in the said shareholding of the petitioner no. 3 company.10. in sitabai ramchandra jaltare's case (supra) the division bench of this court was dealing with the matter pertaining to the right of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 1982 (HC)

G.M. Mohan and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies, Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1985]56CompCas265(Kar); 1983(1)KarLJ128

..... amended in 1974 by the insertion of s. 58a in the companies act, 1956, prohibiting the acceptance of deposits or continuing deposits already ..... ) read with rr. 3(2)(i) and 4 of the companies (acceptance of deposits) rules, 1975. the substance of the allegations in the show-cause notice is that even after the companies act, 1956, was ..... the companies act, 1956. the company also is joined as a petitioner. the petitioners have been issued show-cause notices by the registrar of companies in karnataka, dated june 26, 1982, calling upon the directors of the company as to why the company and its directors of the company as to why the company and its directors should not be prosecuted for violating the provisions of s. 58(3)(c .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 2004 (HC)

J.M. International Vs. Magan Roller Flour Mills (P.) Ltd.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : [2005]60SCL404(Raj)

..... for the petitioner-company i am of the opinion that in such matters ..... notice dated 27th of april, 2004, the petitioners have not received any response at all. the petitioners are convinced that the respondent-company is unable to pay the debts to its creditors within the meaning of section 433(3) of the companies act, 1956. the photostat copies of returned registered envelop dated 7-5-2004, receipt of registered post a/d, a/d card, returned u ..... learned counsel for the petitioner-company and perused the entire material available on the record of the petition.2. this is the company petition under sections 433 and 434 of the companies act, 1956 filed by the petitioner-company with a prayer that the respondent-company m/s. magan roller flour mills private limited be wound up under the provisions of section 443 of the companies act, 1956.3. having heard learned counsel .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 26 1999 (HC)

Century Plyboards (India) Ltd. Vs. the Advertising Standards Council o ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1999(4)ALLMR665; 2000(1)BomCR136; 1999(3)MhLj543

..... has been taken out for restraining the defendants from acting in furtherance of the aforesaid two orders during the pendency of the suit. 3. the defendants are a company registered under the companies act, 1956. they have been permitted to drop the word limited after obtaining approval from the central government under section 25 of the companies act, 1956. the main objects of the defendants are set out ..... conduct of the defendant is accepted by the plaintiffs. 7. i have considered the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the parties. undoubtedly defendant is a company which is governed by the provisions of the companies act. therefore, the members of the company would be bound by all the directions which are issued by the board of directors of the ..... company. any directions issued by this company are not binding on the plaintiff. restrictive order can only be passed by the state in exercise of its powers under article 19 ..... passed by the defendant had adversely affected the plaintiffs' reputation. in the letter dated 19th february, 1999 the plaintiff brought to the notice of the defendant that the competitor company has been conducting a misleading vicious and unsubstantiated vilification campaign against the plaintiffs. taking advantage of the first order dated 28-12-1998, indian plywood . (i.p.m. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 1963 (HC)

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner K.S. Naik Vs. Official Liquidator

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [1964(9)FLR291]; (1964)ILLJ699Kant

..... items claimed by him should be deemed to be included among the debts entitled to preferential payment under the companies act. the relevant portion of that section reads as follows : 'where any employer ... being a company, an order winding up is made, the amount due - (a) from the employer in relation to ..... be read as references to those provisions as re-enacted in the consolidating statute. 10. the companies act of 1956 is an act to consolidate and amend the law relating to companies. it repealed, among other statutes, the companies act of 1913. though in certain important respects changes were made in the law, the general ..... 3) to (5) on the ground that a claim for preferential payment must be made out on one or the other of the clauses of s. 530 of the companies act of 1956 and that such claim in this case may be said to have been made out only in respect of items (1) and (2) under clause (f) of sub-section ..... (1) of s. 530. 5. the appellant claims that all the items mentioned above are entitled to preferential payment by virtue of s. 11 of the employees' provident funds act ..... order1. this is an appeal under rule 164 of the companies (court) rules, 1959, read with s. 457(3) of the companies act of 1956 by the regional provident fund commissioner of mysore at bangalore against the order of the official liquidator dated 29 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1960 (HC)

Sarkar Estates (Private) Ltd. Vs. Kusumika Iron Works (Private) Ltd. a ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1961Cal439,[1962]32CompCas575(Cal)

..... tendered to the addressee by the postal peon but the addressee refuses to accept the letter, there is no delivery of the letter within the meaning of section 434(1)(a) of the indian companies act, 1956? in my view, the answer should be in the negative. i do not think that as a matter of construction it is reasonable to limit the meaning ..... to be served on the company 'by causing it to be delivered at its registered office, by registered post ..... limited carries on any business at the registered address of the appellant company. it is clear that by reason of the provisions of the indian companies act, 1956, the word 'private' had to be introduced in the name of this company which was a private company. (see sections 13(1) and 24(1) of the indian companies act, 1956.) but there is no scope for any doubt that the letter ..... clause not being in accordance with order 19, rule 3 of the code, there is no legal evidence before the court to prove the service of the letter of demand upon the appellant company.3. the other point which has been argued on behalf of the appellant company is that section 434(1)(a) of the indian companies act, 1956, requires that the statutory notice of demand has .....

Tag this Judgment!

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