Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian companies act 1956 Page 1 of about 206,911 results (0.326 seconds)

Jan 06 1958 (HC)

Major General Shanta Shamsher Jung Bahadur Rana Vs. Kamani Brothers Pr ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1959Bom201; (1958)60BOMLR1024; [1959]29CompCas501(Bom)

..... make him a managing director within the meaning thereof under section 2(26). he further argued that the definition of 'officer' under section 2(30) of the indian companies act, 1956, would not include a managing director and that this shows that the office fundamentally is that of a director only, that there is no separate office of a managing director ..... opinion quite rightly so because as joint managing director the plaintiff had certain rights only to manage the property and the first defendant company and not the plaintiff who owned the property. as regards section 2(26) of the indian companies act, 1956 mr. munshi pointed out that the entrustment of the smallest power, e.g., like signing cheques or being sent to indore for ..... -1955 in the grade of rs. 2,000-10-2500 plus rent free house.' 6. on the 1st of april, 1956 the indian companies act, 1956 came into operation. as the plaintiff held an office of profit and as section 314 of the said act required that the plaintiff could not hold the said office of profit except with the previous consent of the first defendant ..... c the plaintiff was appointed joint managing director on 24th june, 1957 and acted as such. he also referred to section 2(26) of the indian companies act, 1956 which states that 'managing director' means a director who by virtue of an agreement with the company or by a resolution passed by the company in general meeting or by its board of directors or by virtue of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 1963 (SC)

Societe De Traction Et D'electricite Societe Anonyme Vs. Kamani Engine ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1964SC558; (1964)66BOMLR392; [1963]33CompCas869(SC); [1964]3SCR116

..... for arbitration, and similar provisions. 7. kamani is, as already stated, a company registered under the indian companies act of 1913 and by s. 3(1) of the indian companies, act 1956, is a 'company' for the purposes of that act. section 389 of the indian companies act, 1956 (before it was repealed by act 65 of 1960) read as follows :- '(1) a company may, by written agreement refer to arbitration, in accordance with the arbitration ..... act, 1940 (x of 1940), an existing or future difference between itself and any other company ..... court. the high court held that the arbitration clause of the collaboration agreement was invalid, for it obliged kamani, contrary to s. 389 of the indian companies act, 1956, to go to arbitration otherwise than in accordance with the arbitration act x of 1940. 5. the relevant rules of the international chamber of commerce may be summarised. article 7 provides by clause (1) that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 20 2012 (SC)

Vodafone International Holdings B.V. Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... revenue and tax payers at bay. holding company and subsidiary company 56. companies act in india and all over the world have statutorily recognised subsidiary company as a separate legal entity. section 2(47) of the indian companies act 1956 defines subsidiary company or subsidiary, a subsidiary company within the meaning of section 4 of the act. for the purpose of indian companies act, a company shall be subject to the provisions of sub ..... in dubious methods for tax evasion. (b) tax avoidance and tax evasion: tax avoidance and tax evasion are two expressions which find no definition either in the indian companies act, 1956 or the income tax act, 1961. but the expressions are being used in different contexts by our courts as well as the courts in england and various other countries, when a subject ..... we find no merit in these arguments. at the outset, we do not wish to pronounce authoritatively on the companies law of cayman islands. be that as it may, under the indian companies act, 1956, the situs of the shares would be where the company is incorporated and where its shares can be transferred. in the present case, it has been asserted by vih ..... of contract can be restricted by law only in cases where it is for some good for the community. companies act 1956 or the fera 1973, rbi regulation or the i.t. act do not explicitly or impliedly forbid shareholders of a company to enter into agreements as to how they should exercise voting rights attached to their shares. 64. shareholders can .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 2011 (HC)

Hi Point Services Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Chloro Controls (India) Pvt.Ltd. and or ...

Court : Delhi

..... viz.capital controls india pvt.ltd., is a private limited company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 in implementation of the joint venture agreement dated 16.11.1995 executed between the plaintiff and madhusudan b.kocha (defendant no.9) on one hand and defendant ..... 3 and 5 to 11 respectively. the parties shall hereinafter be referred as per their status in the suit. 3. plaintiff is a private limited company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 and is a holding company incorporated to hold 50% share holdings in the capital controls india private limited (defendant no.5), which is the joint venture ..... of the defendant no.3. hi point services pvt.ltd., defendant no.4 is a private limited company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 and interalia carries on business in electro chlorination equipments. defendant no.4 had a tie up with american company called exceltec inc who were engaged in the business of electrolytic disinfection equipment. 5. defendant no.5 ..... of chlorination equipments including gas and electro chlorination equipments. defendant nos.1 & 2 are group companies and were earlier part of capital controls group not being defendant no.5 herein. 4. defendant no.3 is the company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 and carries on business of manufacture and marketing of electro chlorination equipments. in or about in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 1989 (HC)

Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rangaswamy and Others

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1990Mad160

..... contentions have been raised. the neyveli lignite corporation ltd., which shall hereinafter bereferred to as the 'corporation' is a government of india enterprise incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956. it was formed in 1956 for the industrial and commercial exploitation of the lignite deposits in certain areas of south arcot district, tamil nadu in open cast mines and to utilise the same ..... categorical terras. it is to be noticed that this section occurs after various provisions relating to acquisition for a public purpose under part ii of the act and for companies under part vii of the act. as already pointed out, the person interested has been clearly indicated in the said provisions and nowhere we find that any right has been conferred ..... raise a question of jurisdiction and competency of the reference. the learned judge, considering the provisions of section 50(2) of the act, observed as follows:-- 'in most unambiguous language, it provides that the local authority or company may appear and adduce evidence for one particular purpose, namely, the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. the learned judge was ..... holder claimed right in the compensation amountand, therefore, he was treated as a person interested for the purpose of the proceedings under the land acquisition act. as far as facts of the case in indian rare earth's case are concerned, no such interest in the compensation amount was claimed as in the present cases and, therefore, the reliance made .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1967 (HC)

V. Selvaraj Vs. Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund Ltd. and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1968Mad378

..... hall for the commencement and conduct of the meeting, so that it may be held within the meaning of sec. 166 of the indian companies act, 1956, it cannot be said with any amount of precision on that circumstance alone that they gathered there with the object of commencing and conducting ..... of directors of the above fund which is a public limited company, and for certain incidental orders. the 1st respondent in the said application ..... applications were taken up together for hearing, as common questions are involved. company applications no. 124 of 1967 is by a shareholder of the mylapore hindu permanent fund limited, which is governed by the provisions of the indian companies act, 1956, for a direction restraining respondents 2 to 5 from exercising the functions ..... they did not hold the same, they have got other remedies to pursue. this is not a case under s. 167 of the indian companies act, because there was not default on the part of the board of directors to hold the meeting. the powers of the central government to ..... that an independent chairman be appointed for holding and conducting the same and for holding the election of directors as per provisions of the companies act and for consideration of other subjects to be tabled in the agenda. notice of this application was directed to be published by me in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 2013 (SC)

Balmer Lawrie and Co. Ltd. and Others Vs. Partha Sarathi Sen Roy and O ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... constitution), and is thus, amenable to writ jurisdiction.2. facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are:a. the appellant is a public limited company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956. the shares of the appellant company were originally held by indo-burma petroleum co. ltd., life insurance corporation, unit trust of india, general insurance corporation and its subsidiaries, nationalised banks and ..... which is a subsidiary of a government company. the appellant company has also been receiving grant-in-aid from the oil industry development board by way of a grant ..... existing provisions, be entitled to appoint one or more directors in the company for such period, and upon such terms and conditions, as the president of india may from time to time decide are required. in view of the provisions of section 617 of the companies act, 1956, a government company has been defined by way of an inclusive definition, as that ..... vacancy under the provisions of article 10.xx xx xx26aa. notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in these articles, so long as the company remains a government company within the meaning of section 617 of the act, the president of india shall be entitled to issue from to time such directives or instructions as may be considered necessary to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 1996 (HC)

D. Ganesan and Others Vs. M.S. Chandra Bose and Another

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1997Mad190; [1999]95CompCas88(Mad); 1996(2)CTC490

..... with regard to the continuance of defendants ! to 4 as directors of the said bank. (iii) in view of various provisions under the indian companies act, 1956, the civil court has no jurisdiction. (iv) as per section 256 of the companies act, the defendants are entitled to continue as directors until the next general body meeting is convened. 3. in the light of the broad submissions ..... court held that compensation payable to the owners of land had to be determined on the basis of the market-value on the dates of the notifications, dated november 2, 1956 and june 3, 1958 and not on the basis of the notification, dated january 12, 1955. to revise that decision, jurisdiction of the high court under article 227 of the ..... to correct an error apparent on the face of the record much less an error of law. in exercising the supervisory power under art. 227, the high court does not act as an appellate court or tribunal. it will not review or reweigh the evidence upon which the determination of the inferior court or tribunal purports to be based or to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 1965 (HC)

Sri Arthanari Transport (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. K.P. Swami Gounder and o ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1966Mad231; (1965)2MLJ504

..... for any lawful purpose may torm a private company by subscribing their names to a memorandum of association and otherwise ..... complying with the requirements of the act in respect of registration. it is important to note ..... persons who should join to form a private company. this change of situation obviously occurred in spite of the intention of the plaintiffs and defendants 2 to 8 together to form the company and be its members and first directors.(6) section 12 of the indian companies act, 1956, relates to the mode of forming incorporated companies and says that two or more persons associated ..... his appointment he must obtain his qualification within two months thereafter. no doubt, under regulation 64 of the regulations for management of a company limited by shares in table a of schedule i to the act, the number of directors and the names of the first directors shall be determined in writing by the subscribers of the memorandum or a .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 1958 (HC)

Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Company, Ltd. Vs. Maruf B.M. (Government ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1958)IILLJ123Bom

..... meeting is required for doing any act or thing. now in the present case the labour officer ..... resign if he feels that the affairs of the company are conducted in a manner which infringes the law regulating employer-employee relations. section 291 of the indian companies act, 1956, gives power to the board of directors of a company to exercise such powers and to do all such acts and things as the company is authorized to act and do, except when the authority of a general ..... difficult to support the view that the word 'employer' in s. 106, in the case of a limited company, means only the company as a legal entity and not its agents who have the management and control of the mill and by whose acts the company is bound, and that these agents are not bound by the award. applicant 2 is alleged to be ..... directors would be liable, there can be no question that a director who has the management and control of the company's mill can be proceeded against for an act or omission which would amount to an infringement of s. 106 of the act. 7. for the foregoing reasons i, reject the contentions urged on behalf of the applicants and hold that the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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