Search Results for "Samrat Shipping"

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 Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "Samrat Shipping"

6 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 6 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Considers Quashing of Cheque Dishonour Complaint for Procedural Irregularities. Taking Cognizance After Recording Sworn Statement and Validity of Power of Attorney Holder's Complaint Examined Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4 Jul 2022

The High Court of Karnataka heard writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Complainant in Negotiable Instruments Act Case by Reversing High Court's Quashing of Cognizance. Authorized Representative's Complaint Held Competent Under Section 142 as Payee Company Filed Through Knowledgeable Manager, Despite Lack of Explicit Averments, Restoring Magistrate's Order.

22 Feb 2022

The dispute arose from a cheque dishonour case under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The appellant company, as payee, filed a complaint under Se...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Disposes Admiralty Suit as Settled Between Parties. Mutual Settlement Reached in Claim for Unpaid Wages and Arrest of Vessel M.V. Maharshi Mahatreya.

5 Jul 2016

The petitioner, Sri. Rajkiran Sadanand Raikar, filed a civil petition under Sections 9 and 26 read with Order 7 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure,...

High Court

CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 100 OF 2012

29 Jan 2016

...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal in NI Act Case — Complainant Company's Authorised Representative Held Competent to File Complaint. The court set aside acquittal and remanded the case for fresh consideration on merits, finding that the trial court erred in holding that the complaint was not filed by an authorised person.

27 Sep 2013

The appellant, M/s Canara Workshops Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiab...

High Court

Bombay High Court pronounces judgment on Letters Patent appeals in oppression and mismanagement case under Companies Act, 1956 — dispute over diversion of Contship agency business. The Court examined whether directors' diversion of business opportunity amounted to oppression and breach of fiduciary duty under Sections 397, 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 and Section 88 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882.

31 Mar 2006

The appeals arose from a dispute between the Puri Group and the Sippy Group, both holding equal shares and equal directorships in two private Indian s...

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