Bombay High Court Adjudicates a Batch of Writ Petitions Filed Against National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. and Others. Petitions Relate to Claims Arising from Alleged Default of a Trading Member and the Role of Regulatory Bodies.
1 Jan 1970...
Search Results for "Stock broker"
208 result(s) found
Found 208 result(s)
High Court
High Court of Bombay Sets Aside Arbitral Award in Stock Broker Dispute Due to Perverse Findings. Arbitrator's Failure to Consider Admitted Documents and Ledger Accounts Constitutes Patent Illegality Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
20 Jun 2012The petitioner, Shilpa Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd., a stock broker and member of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. (NSEIL) and Bombay Stock Exchang...
- 80
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Case on Interest Deduction Under Section 36(1)(iii) — Section 14A Not Applicable When No Exempt Income Earned. Interest on Borrowed Capital Invested in Shares of Own Companies Held Allowable as Business Expenditure.
1 Mar 2024The appellant, Mahesh K. Mehta, a chartered accountant turned stock broker, acquired membership of the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1987 and the National ...
- 82
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging SEBI Consent Guidelines Requiring Pendency of Proceedings. Requirement of pendency of court proceedings or adjudication for consent applications under SEBI Guidelines is not arbitrary and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.
17 Jan 2012The petitioners, Shilpa Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd. and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of cl...
- 126
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitral Award in Stock Exchange Dispute — No Grounds for Interference Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that the arbitral award was not in conflict with public policy and did not suffer from patent illegality, as the tribunal's findings were based on evidence and were plausible.
30 Nov -0001The petitioner, MPDA Associates Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration ...
- 80
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Co-operative Bank in Government Securities Scam Case — Upholds Trial Court's Finding of No Entitlement to Return of Securities or Recovery of Value. The Court held that the plaintiff bank failed to prove its title to the securities and that the transactions were void ab initio due to fraud, and the bank was not entitled to any relief.
7 Apr 2021The appellant, The Amravati Peoples’ Co-operative Bank Ltd. (plaintiff), filed a suit for return of government securities sold by it or in the alter...
- 65
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Dismisses Revenue Appeal in Income Tax Case; Arrear Dividends on Shares Held Not Taxable as Income. Purchase of Shares Cum-Dividend Implied Price Included Dividend Amount, Which Was Not Income of the Purchaser but Capital Receipt Under Income-tax Act, 1922.
7 Aug 1969The case involved a tax dispute regarding the treatment of arrear dividends received by the respondent, India Discount Co. Ltd., a dealer in shares an...
- 97
High Court
Special Court Declares Transaction Void Under Special Court Act 1992 — Custodian's Petition Allowed. Transaction dated 18th/19th February 1992 between respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 declared void under Section 3(3) of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act 1992.
24 Aug 2005The Custodian filed a petition under the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act 1992 seeking a declaration that ...
- 256
High Court
Bombay High Court Hears Suit for Redemption of Pledged Securities After Loan Default; Plaintiffs Abandoned Main Claim of Transfer Agreement. Pledge Agreement Clause 14(ii) Notice and Default by Pledgor Form Core of Dispute Over Shares of Sesa Sterlite.
5 Jan 2018The suit was filed by Harinarayan G. Bajaj and others against Reliance Capital Limited and Sesa Sterlite Limited. Plaintiffs borrowed a total of Rs.10...
- 84
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Holds Section 15J Factors Illustrative in SEBI Penalty Adjudication. Adjudicating Officer Retains Discretion to Consider Mitigating Circumstances Beyond Stipulated Factors Under SEBI Act.
28 Feb 2019The Supreme Court of India adjudicated a reference arising from multiple civil appeals concerning the interpretation of Section 15J of the Securities ...
- 214
