Case Laws

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited & Others Vs. SEBI.

A landmark judgment was passed on 31st August 2012 by the Supreme Court of India, in Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. and others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and another [2012] 174 Comp Cas 154 (SC) wherein the two companies of the Sahara Group, Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited (SIRECL) and …

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited & Others Vs. SEBI. Read More »

Citimake Builders PVT LTD V.Samata Sahakari Bank LTD[NCDRC]

[Decided on 16/10/2012] Consumer Protection Act – Section 13 – banking service -overdraft account – withdrawal of amounts through forged cheques – whether complaint maintainable – Held, No. Brief facts Complainants opened Current Account with the opposite party and the said account was operated by Naresh Jain and Abdul Wahid Abdul Gafoor Khatri. On scrutiny …

Citimake Builders PVT LTD V.Samata Sahakari Bank LTD[NCDRC] Read More »

ROCKSMELT COMPANY (INDIA) LTD V.GANGA AUTOMOBILES LTD [DEL]

[Decided on 08/10/2012] Companies Act,1956 – Winding up – directors personal properties – director gives undertaking to court that his personal properties can be attached – Later denied – whether tenable – On facts Held, No. Brief facts The respondent company was under liquidation. One of the directors of the company Mr.Mukhinder Singh (who died …

ROCKSMELT COMPANY (INDIA) LTD V.GANGA AUTOMOBILES LTD [DEL] Read More »

SMT. SEEMA THAKUR & ORS V. SMT. PANCHI DEVI & ORS [DEL]

[Decided on 21/09/2012] Indian Stamp Act,1899 – Article 45 read with Section 2(15) – partition suit- shares are determined – stamp duty there on – whether passing of a final decree is required – Held, Yes. Brief facts This suit was compromised and the compromise was recorded on 16.11.2005. Rights of the parties in various …

SMT. SEEMA THAKUR & ORS V. SMT. PANCHI DEVI & ORS [DEL] Read More »

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax V. Biraj Investment (P) Ltd [Guj]

Section 108 of the Companies Act,1956 read with Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – transfer of shares – assessee transferred pledged shares and showed capital gains as well as loss – AO rejected the claim on the ground that pledged shares cannot be transferred – whether tenable- Held, No. Brief facts   …

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax V. Biraj Investment (P) Ltd [Guj] Read More »

SANJAY GHAI Vs. ASSTT. CIT & ORS. in W.P.(C) 2303/2012 & 5175/2012 Dated 11.10.2012 (DHC)

Case Decided  on – 11.10.2012 Issue Involved: In this case, the issue involved was that if there is a default on the part of a private limited company in payment of its income tax dues to the Income Tax Department then the liability of the company can be shifted to its director(s) u/s 179 of …

SANJAY GHAI Vs. ASSTT. CIT & ORS. in W.P.(C) 2303/2012 & 5175/2012 Dated 11.10.2012 (DHC) Read More »

Can a High Court dismiss the Appeal of the Appellant and commence contempt proceedings ?

Relevant Act : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Decided Case Law : Mohit Electronics & Workman Tahir Hussan (Del) Facts of the Case : The Labour Court directed the management for payment of wages to Workmen. Management appealed to High Court without complying the order of Labour Court. The Writ Petition filed by the appellant was …

Can a High Court dismiss the Appeal of the Appellant and commence contempt proceedings ? Read More »

Can a Arbitrator order winding up of a company ?

Relevant Act : Companies Act, 1956. Decided Case Law : Haryana Telecom Ltd  Vs Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Case Decided by : Supreme Court Clarification : The Arbitrator can refer the matters relating to disputes for which he is empowered to  decide. An Arbitrator, not withstanding any agreement between the parties, would have no jurisdiction …

Can a Arbitrator order winding up of a company ? Read More »

Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs Unitech Pharmaceuticals Private Limited

Trademark Act, 1999 – Use of a Trademark which is deceptively similar to another Trademark – whether valid? Brief facts The Plaintiff (Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals Limited) claimed that the defendants (Unitech Pharmaceuticals Private Limited) are selling products under the Trademark “FEXIM” that is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff ‘s mark “PHEXIN” which is used …

Glaxo Smith Kline Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs Unitech Pharmaceuticals Private Limited Read More »