Search Results for "Section 483 Companies Act"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment...
Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witn...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Death Not Arising O...

Search Results for "Section 483 Companies Act"

66 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 66 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Former Promoter in PMLA Case Citing Long Incarceration and Delayed Trial. The court held that the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA were not satisfied and that continued detention violated Article 21.

1 Jan 2026

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of Arvind Dham, a former promoter and non-executive chairman of Amtek Auto Ltd., against the Delhi High Court's o...

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Applicant in PMLA Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence of Money Laundering. The court held that mere association with a shell entity without direct evidence of laundering proceeds of crime does not constitute an offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

5 Dec 2025

The applicant, Khilji Mohsinahmed Mustakali, filed a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) read wi...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Holds Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrators Violates Equality Principle Under Section 18 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Party Autonomy Cannot Override Mandatory Requirement of Independence and Impartiality, and Unilateral Appointment Clauses in Public-Private Contracts Are Unconscionable and Void.

13 Nov 2024

The Supreme Court of India, in a Constitution Bench judgment, addressed the validity of unilateral appointment of arbitrators under the Arbitration an...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Petition by Foreign Shareholder Challenging Constitutional Validity of Section 272(1)(e) Companies Act, 2013. Section 272(1)(e) is not ultra vires the Constitution; second proviso to Section 272(3) does not apply to petitions under Section 272(1)(e).

28 Apr 2021

The petitioner, Devas Employees Mauritius Private Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of Mauritius and a shareholder of Devas Multimedia Pr...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Official Liquidator's Report in Winding Up of Transpower Engineering Ltd. — Holds Sale by Liquidator is Formal Transfer Not Subject to Differential Premium. Court exercises powers under Section 446(2) of Companies Act, 1956 to waive extension charges claimed by MIDC.

26 Jul 2018

The Official Liquidator filed a report seeking directions regarding the sale of two industrial plots allotted by MIDC to Transpower Engineering Ltd. (...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Municipal Council's Appeal Against Decree in Terms of Arbitral Award in Octroi Collection Dispute. Court Holds That Objections Under Section 30 of Arbitration Act, 1940 Cannot Be Raised After Award Is Made Rule of Court.

4 Aug 2016

The appellant, Ambernath Municipal Council, a body corporate under the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeal by Kingfisher Airlines Against Winding Up Petition Filed by Aerotron Limited — Debt Acknowledged in Agreement Not Disputed Bona Fide. The court held that the appellant's acknowledgment of liability in the agreement dated 24.02.2012 and failure to pay installments as per schedule meant the debt was not bona fide disputed, making the winding up petition maintainable under Section 433(e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956.

15 Jul 2015

The respondent, Aerotron Limited, a company incorporated in the United Kingdom, filed a company petition under Section 433(e) and (f) read with Sectio...

High Court

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Appeal for Impleadment in Winding Up Proceedings Due to Lack of Shareholding and Delay. Appellant, who sold his shares and ceased to be a shareholder, cannot seek impleadment in company winding up proceedings under Section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956.

25 Feb 2015

The appellant, Dr. Kirtivan D. Kotian, along with his family members, originally held over 95% shares of M/s S. Manikya Plastichem Private Limited and...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeal by Corporate Debtor Against Banks in SARFAESI Act Proceedings — Civil Suit Barred Under Section 34 of SARFAESI Act as Alternative Remedy Under Section 17 Before DRT Exists.

29 Jan 2014

The appellant, Kingfisher Airlines Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, had availed various credit facilities from a consortiu...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Company Judge's Order Refusing to Set Aside Attachment of Property by Official Liquidator. Held that the Company Court has jurisdiction to decide questions relating to title and possession of property under Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, and the appellants failed to establish their title.

22 Mar 2010

The appellants, Laxman Yeswant Prabhudesai, Uday Laxman Prabhudesai, and Gayatri Uday Prabhudesai, filed an appeal under Section 483 of the Companies ...

1 2 3 4

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)