Search Results for "transferee company"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Di...
Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Crim...
Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findi...
High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Acc...

Search Results for "transferee company"

284 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 284 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Sanctions Scheme of Amalgamation Between Casby CFS Pvt. Ltd. and Casby Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Under Section 394 of Companies Act, 1956 — Restructuring of Casby Group Approved. Court found the scheme fair, reasonable, and not contrary to public interest, with no objections from Regional Director.

19 Mar 2015

The judgment concerns a petition filed by Casby CFS Pvt. Ltd. (Transferor) and Casby Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Transferee) seeking sanction of a scheme of ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Sanctions Scheme of Arrangement for Amalgamation of Five Transferor Companies with Unichem Laboratories Limited. Scheme held fair and reasonable under Sections 391-394 of Companies Act, 1956, despite shareholder objection.

12 Jul 2012

The judgment concerns five Company Scheme Petitions filed under Sections 391 to 394 read with Sections 80, 100 to 103 of the Companies Act, 1956, seek...

High Court

Bombay High Court Sanctions Scheme of Amalgamation of Monarch Research and Brokerage Private Limited and Monarch Project and Finmarkets Limited with Networth Stock Broking Limited under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 — Objection by Gold Castle Realtor Dismissed as Not a Creditor or Member.

7 Aug 2014

The judgment concerns two Company Scheme Petitions (CSP 575/2012 and CSP 576/2012) filed by Monarch Project and Finmarkets Limited (2nd Transferor Com...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Revenue's Appeal in Income Tax Case — Amalgamated Company Must File Return for Pre-Amalgamation Period. Section 153A Notice Validly Issued to Transferor Company Despite Amalgamation, and Failure to File Return Attracts Penalty Under Section 276CC.

1 Jan 2022

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) against the order of the Delhi High Court, which had ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Rules Against Stamp Duty on Amalgamation Orders Under Companies Act, 1956. Court Order Sanctioning Scheme of Amalgamation Is Not a Conveyance Under Bombay Stamp Act, 1958.

31 Mar 2016

The case involved a reference under the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, arising from a scheme of amalgamation between Reliance Industries Limited (transferee)...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals Against Rejection of Winding Up Petitions Under Sections 433 and 434 of Companies Act, 1956 — Held That Disputed Debts Require Trial and Cannot Be Decided in Summary Proceedings. The court set aside the dismissal order and remanded for consideration of interim relief, directing the respondent to deposit the disputed amount or provide security.

7 Jan 2013

The appellants, Innovatherm GmbH and Electrification Charpente Levage SAS, filed winding up petitions under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act,...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Remands Oppression Petition in Share Allotment Dispute Under Sections 397/398 of Companies Act, 1956 — Preference Shareholder's Voting Rights and Validity of Allotments Require Reconsideration. The Court held that the allotments were made in compliance with Section 81(1A) but the High Court failed to properly assess the allegations of oppression, necessitating a fresh hearing by the Company Law Board.

10 May 2019

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Delhi High Court which set aside an order of the Company Law Board (CLB) in a petition under Sections 397 and ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals in Property Suit — Upholds Refusal to Strike Out Defence Under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC for Failure to File Written Statement Within 90 Days. The court held that the power to strike out defence is discretionary and not automatic, and that non-disclosure of defence under Order 6A Rule 3 CPC does not justify striking out.

21 Dec 2017

The present appeals arise from a suit filed in 1987 by Behram Nowrosji Gamadia and Jehangir Dhan Mistri (original plaintiffs) against several defendan...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reverses High Court in SICA Case on Unsecured Creditor Rights - Sanctioned Rehabilitation Scheme Binding on All Creditors. Court held that under Sections 18(8) and 32 of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, unsecured creditors cannot opt out of scaled-down payments and must accept scheme terms for company revival.

17 Mar 2023

The Supreme Court addressed a group of appeals concerning the binding effect of rehabilitation schemes sanctioned under the Sick Industrial Companies ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Sanctions Amalgamation Scheme Under Sections 391-394 of Companies Act, 1956 — No Objections Raised by Regional Director or Official Liquidator. Court Held Scheme Fair and Reasonable and Not Contrary to Public Interest.

10 Feb 2005

The Bombay High Court, exercising its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, considered two company petitions filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Co...

1 2 3

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