Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: secured indian contract act Page 1 of about 42,244 results (0.157 seconds)

Aug 25 2003 (TRI)

Col. K.S. Malik and anr. Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce and ors.

Court : DRAT Delhi

Reported in : III(2004)BC233

..... plea of discharge. but as pointed out already, it is the duty of the respondent-bank, in terms of the provisions of sections 139 and 141 of the indian contract act, to keep the security intact and to make it available to the surety for appropriate remedy. this burden cast upon the respondent-bank by the provisions of sections 139 and 141 cannot be ..... all these aspects in the light of the provisions of sections 139 and 141 of the indian contract act and the decisions referred to (supra), it will be clear that the respondent-bank has been negligent, and that it had not taken any action to have the prime security intact. it is evident that it is because of the negligence of the respondent-bank ..... and 141 of the indian contract act also. therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent-bank that there is a contract to the contrary, i.e. the appellants/defendants have agreed that they will not be entitled to the benefits of the provisions of sections 139 and 141 of the contract act even if the respondent-bank parts with the security, and, therefore, the ..... the respondent-bank parts with the security and, therefore, the appellants/defendants cannot contend that they are discharged of their liability in the circumstances of the case.31. but, the learned counsel for the appellants/defendants, on the other hand, contends that the rights conferred upon the surety under sections 139 and 141 of the indian contract act are absolute and are not subject .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1993 (HC)

Bank of India Vs. Aiyars Advertising and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1994(3)BomCR601

..... hypothecation of book debts. the defendants aver that as a result of negligence and lack of diligence on the part of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs have lost a security created in their favour. the defendants aver that under section 140 of the indian contract act this security would have been endured for the benefit of the defendants. the defendants aver that the value of the ..... of these defendants.41. the submission of the defendants is based upon sections 139 and 141 of the indian contract act. based on these two sections it is submitted that admittedly the plaintiffs bank had, on the date that the deed of guarantees was obtained, another security from the 1st defendant by way of hypothecation of book debts. it is submitted that the hypothecation ..... security which has been lost and/or impaired is in excess of the sum claimed by the plaintiffs from these defendants. the defendants aver that as the value of the ..... the subject is very clear. it does not require many or any authorities. the provision regarding indemnities and guarantees are contained in chapter viii - sections 124 to 147 of the indian contract act. it would be convenient to set out the relevant sections in this behalf. section 128 reads as follows:'section 128: the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 1972 (HC)

Variety Body Builders a Partnership Firm at Baroda Vs. the Union of In ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1973Guj256; (1973)0GLR998

..... penal. it was pointed out that the security deposit was merely kept by the department with itself for due performance of the contact and therefore. this forfeiture would ..... this appeal is purely on the question whether the whole of the security deposit becomes liable to forfeiture on account of the termination of the contract. now on this question the contention which is put forward on behalf of the appellant is that according to section 74 of the indian contract act the security deposit could not have been forfeited as the said forfeiture would be ..... whether the stipulation as regards the forfeitures contained in the above clause, is governed by section 74 of the contract act or no, it is necessary to notice that this clause contemplates two consequence on rescission of the contract namely, (1) forfeiture of security deposit and (2) railway's right to recover any amount by which the cost of the completing the work ..... the railway administration put forward any defence of this type. it follows, therefore, that the stipulation sin the contract as regards the forfeiture of the deposit taken with a view to secure the performance of the contract, is controlled by the provisions of section 74 of the contract act.12. if that be so, the respondent it is shown that the breach of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 2005 (HC)

The Akola Oil Industries (Under Liquidation) Vs. State Bank of India

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR706; [2006]66SCL147(Bom)

..... state bank took action under section 13(4) thereof its claim was within limitation as per limitation act, 1963.7. provisions of section 31 of securitisation act are very clear and say that does not apply to a lien on any goods or security given under indian contract act, a pledge of movables. it is revealed that the state bank is also proceeding against certain ..... movables like valuable utensils, ornaments, jewelry etc. however said act is apparently without jurisdiction and therefore, cannot be permitted. said movables have already vested in official ..... for realising its security.b. advocate deshpande has also relied upon judgment of this court reported at 1994 (81) comp cas 599 between indian textiles and anr. v. gujarat state financial corporation and ors. the learned single judge of this court has held that by virtue of operation of provisions contained in section 456 of the companies act, the official liquidator ..... court has considered this position & its findings can be stated thus. the rights of the state financial corporation under section 29 of the state financial corporations act (sfc act) to sell and realise the security cannot be exercised without reference to the company court when a winding up order is made against the company. the moment a winding up order is made .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 2007 (HC)

Dadha Estates Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Managing Director, Mr. Mahendar D ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR2007Mad217

..... total misinterpretation to say that sarfaesi act will not ..... any of the provisions of the sarfaesi act, 2002. it is a ..... that section 31 of the sarfaesi act, 2002 would apply only in a case where the secured creditor started initiating proceedings under the sarfaesi act, 2002 when the secured creditor has only a lien on the goods, money or security given under the indian contract act, 1872. in other words, a secured creditor who has got only a lien on the goods, money or security given under the indian contract act, 1872 cannot resort to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2007 (HC)

Harinarayan G. Bajaj Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through Secretary, Mini ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(1)ALLMR604; 2008(2)BomCR780; [2009]147CompCas579(Bom); [2008]82SCL79(Bom)

..... in india. 11. it is submitted that the securities contract regulation act under which the stock exchanges have to be recognised is intended 'to prevent undesirable transaction in securities by regulating the business of dealing therein by prohibiting options and by providing for certain other matters connected therewith'. the securities contract act, therefore, is to regulate the business of securities marketed on recognised stock exchanges in india. the ..... early guard have acted in concert or acquired voting rights in respondent no. 3 is not tenable ..... in respondent no. 3. respondent no. 3 has not issued any security which would entitle the holder to receive shares with voting rights in respondent no. 3. also, the securities of respondent no. 3 which are registered under the securities contract (regulation) act with the indian stock exchanges are its shares and not other securities. therefore, it is their case that the petitioner'scontention that mitsui and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 06 1997 (TRI)

Shashi Prakash Khemka and ors. Vs. Nepc Micon Ltd.

Court : Company Law Board CLB

..... by a company.33. the depositories ordinance/act has brought about comprehensive changes in matters relating to transfer of securities, through amendments to various related statutes, like the companies act, indian stamp act, securities contracts (regulation) act, income-tax act and benami transactions (prohibition) act. the preamble to this act reads "an act to provide for regulation of depositories in securities and for matters connected therewith or incidental ..... that effect in the articles. however, in respect of a listed company, its right to refuse was governed by the provisions of section 22a of the securities contracts (regulation) act (scra). this section specifically provided four grounds under which such right could be exercised and not on any other grounds and even such refusal had to be ..... 1960 sc 794, 796, in which the court, while examining the jurisdiction of the district courts, consequent to the repeal of the indian companies act, 1913, by the companies act, 1956, observed : "section 10 of the act of 1956 deals only with the jurisdiction of courts. it shows that the district courts can no longer be empowered to deal with ..... provisions of section 111 will continue to apply and not section 111a. he supported his arguments by drawing attention to sections 28 and 30 of the depositories act. he attempted a distinct difference between amending a particular statute straightaway and amendment through schedules to a different enactment. in the latter case, he submitted that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 2003 (SC)

Citi Bank N.A. Vs. Standard Chartered Bank and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2003SC4630; I(2004)BC211(SC); [2003]117CompCas554(SC); (2004)1CompLJ121(SC); 2004(2)CTC374; JT2003(10)SC597; 2003(8)SCALE364; (2004)1SCC12; [2003]47SCL582(SC); 2004(1)LC

..... present case would be governed by section 41 of the indian contract act according to him section 63 of indian contact act would be more appropriately applicable. that the citi bank as per decree was required to pay the value of the securities along with interest whereas it has been given in return ..... deliver the said securities stood discharged and the plaintiffs ceased to be liable to the defendant no.2 in respect of the agreement mentioned in para 7 above.' 49. it is true that citi bank in its plaint did not specifically mention section 63 of the indian contract act but overall reading ..... from the citi bank. in our opinion, the special court fell in error in applying section 41 of the indian contract act to the facts of the case. section 41 of the indian contract act only provides that the promise cannot have double satisfaction of its claim i.e. from the promisor as well as ..... any security much less the refund the money. the obligation was substituted by the scb for delivery of sgl of cmf. the scb substituted the obligation to deliver the bonds under two brs by delivery of sgl thereby accepted the satisfaction in terms of section 63 of the indian contract act.' 45 ..... not as an 'absolute discharge'. the conditional discharge having failed, the scb could fall back on the original consideration. that section 63 of the indian contract act was not applicable. that mere signatures or endorsement on the brs, without receipt of bonds which the brs promised, can never discharge the citi bank .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2004 (SC)

Citibank N.A. Vs. Standard Chartered Bank

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : III(2004)BC531; 2004(6)BomCR74; [2004]121CompCas491(SC); (2004)3CompLJ129(SC); JT2004(5)SC280; 2004(6)SCALE165; (2004)6SCC1; [2004]53SCL518(SC); 2005(1)LC60(SC)

orderashok bhan, j.60. this appeal was directed to be tagged with civil appeal no. 7941 of 1995 by this court's order dated 15.9.1997, decided on 8th october, 2003 and reported in 2001 (1) scc 12. in view of the acceptance of the said appeals and dismissal of the suit filed by the scb, this appeal has become infructuous and is dismissed as such.

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2008 (HC)

Mr. Praveen Gupta Vs. Star Share and Stock Brokers Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2008(2)ARBLR131(Delhi); 149(2008)DLT72; 2008(102)DRJ633

..... appropriately done by the arbitral tribunal. on the second point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872 would not come in the way of the present bye-law (3) inasmuch as section 28 only refers to agreements between parties and does not refer to statutory provisions ..... urged on behalf of the petitioner was that the provision of a reduced period of limitation compared to the period prescribed under the limitation act, 1963 would be hit by the provisions of section 28 of the indian contract act, 1872. the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the tribunal has correctly understood the provisions and the factual situation ..... to be regarded as statutory provisions inasmuch as the bye-laws have been framed in exercise of the powers granted to the national stock exchange under section 9 of the securities contract (regulations) act, 1956. 4. i have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. insofar as the first point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner ..... letter dated 31.03.2006 issued by the respondent (star share & stock brokers ltd.) to the petitioner in connection with confirmation of the margin security deposit of rs 20 lacs. the said letter confirms that the margin / security deposit of rs 20 lacs is payable by the respondent (star share & stock brokers ltd.) and will be paid to the petitioner along with .....

Tag this Judgment!

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