Company Law India: Read latest Company law news & updates, acts, circular, notifications & articles issued by MCA amendment in companies Act 2013. Article on Loans Company formation XBRL, Schedule VI IFRS.
Company Law : Learn about CARO, 2020 guidelines for reporting loans, guarantees, security, and investments by companies to ensure compliance and...
Company Law : Ensure compliance with updated Reporting on Audit Trail under Rule 11(g) of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 for 202...
Company Law : Explore various threshold limits under the Companies Act, 2013, with detailed compliance requirements for listed, public, and priv...
Company Law : Understand the latest changes in DIR-3 KYC, including rules for updating email IDs and mobile numbers, fees, and filing details. L...
Company Law : Understand the nuances of signing board reports and financial statements under Companies Act and SEBI (LODR). Learn who must sign ...
Company Law : Explore ICMAI detailed analysis of the Govt. committee report on enhancing cost audit effectiveness. Read insights & recommendatio...
Company Law : Discover the challenges faced by the Institute of Company Secretaries of India in filing Form DPT-3 for FY 2023-24. Learn about te...
Company Law : Explore the challenges faced by newly incorporated companies regarding mandatory ESI and EPF registrations in India, with proposed...
Company Law : Delve into the NFRA order controversy with detailed analysis on penalty imposition, opinion disparities, and key issues. Gain insi...
Company Law : Explore the issues and challenges in processing MCA forms at CPC. Learn about the proposed solutions for timely approval and the i...
Company Law : It is not the scope & objective of IBC to include Banks Financial Institutions who advanced loans to Home Buyers to be considered ...
Company Law : Explore the Calcutta High Court's decision in Uphealth Holdings, INC. Vs Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim & Ors. regarding the applicability ...
Company Law : Read the full NCLT judgment where Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited sought to withdraw its merger with Sony Groups, impacting ...
Company Law : Explore the implications of issuing duplicate debenture certificates under the Companies Act, 2013. Learn about legal remedies, as...
Company Law : Explore the detailed judgment in the Grand Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Nitin Batra & Ors. case by NCLAT Delhi, including key argument...
Company Law : Discover the key changes in the Nidhi (Amendment) Rules, 2024. Learn how the new rules impact Nidhi companies and their naming con...
Company Law : General Circular No- 07/2024: Forms IEPF-3 merges with IEPF-4 and IEPF-7 with IEPF-1 in MCA Version 3. Simplifying compliance for ...
Company Law : Circular No. 06/2024 MCA has waived the additional fee for filing various IEPF e-forms (IEPF-1, IEPF-1A, IEPF-2, IEPF-4) and e-ver...
Company Law : IEPF Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Amendment Rules, 2024: Streamlining online transfers and updated forms. Re...
Company Law : Check out the latest Companies (Incorporation) Amendment Rules 2024 issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs, omitting word Nidhi f...
In its reply dated 19th June 2012 to the notice dated 26th May 2012 the Respondent has denied any liability whatsoever. It is, inter alia, stated in the reply sent by the Respondent through its counsel that “In the facts and circumstances, please advise your client that my client is not liable to pay any sum of US$ 350,000 or any other amount under the Agreement dated 18.05.2008 as alleged.
It is urged by PSPC, on the strength of the decision in Rajasthan Housing Board v. Krishna Kumari [2005] 13 SCC 151, that since the electricity connection was restored to the factory premises in terms of the order dated 18th December 2008 of the Court, the dues of PSPC ought to be directed to be paid straightway by CBL and PSPC should not be relegated to the OL for its dues. The above submission is untenable for more than one reason.
A plain reading of the provisions of Section 188 makes it amply clear that a member who intends getting his proposed resolutions included for circulation to members must have not less than one twentieth of the total voting power of all the members at the date of the requisition or must be not less than 100 members in number to exercise such a right.
Regard being had to the statement of objections the answer to the question as to whether the bearings supplied by the petitioner to the respondent were, in fact, defective or not being a pure question of fact requires an adjudication after a trial. Hence the defence is not a moonshine defence. Since a triable issue has arisen petitioner cannot but be relegated to the Civil Court for appropriate reliefs.
No workmen or employee of the company had appeared to resist the order of winding up. The conduct of those in management of the company in fraudulently selling off assets conservatively estimated at Rs. 2,300 crore makes it just and equitable for the company to be wound up. The company had been unable to show any prospects of it carrying on any business in the near or the distant future. The company’s inability to pay its debts is established and no ground is shown for the company court to exercise its discretion to not wind up the company despite its obvious insolvency.
In the present case, the foundation is the Consultancy Agreement between the parties, where it was agreed, as per the Petitioner, that the Petitioner would get a guaranteed fee of Rs. 50 lacs, which was payable on a monthly basis at the rate of Rs. 3 lacs per month, at least for 12 months, or at the time when the investment size is achieved and/or if the agreement is revoked at Samira’s violation, whichever is earlier, the outstanding balance will be paid as a lump sum. As per the Petitioner, after 12 months from the date of agreement i.e. 22.10.2007, apart from lump sum amount of Rs. 5 lacs, the amount claimed, according to this agreement, was outstanding. This clause itself cannot be read in isolation. The revised clause and the obligation on the part of the Petitioner as referred in other part of the Agreement, just cannot be overlooked. There are no averments to show that they have complied with their part in full and, therefore, they are entitled to claim this full consultancy guaranteed amount as agreed. The Respondent/company in the affidavit has denied and made a positive statement that there were no full compliances by the Petitioner.
After the company petition before the Bombay High Court was withdrawn on 11th November, 2011, notice under section 434(1)(a) was issued on 15th December, 2011 at the registered office of the respondent company. Section 434(1)(a) requires issue of 21 days notice for deeming fiction created by the provision to apply. However, section 434(1)(a) cannot be strictly equated with mandatory statutory notice like the one required under section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, when a suit is to be filed against the Government. For initiating civil proceedings for recovery of a debt, no notice under section 434(1)(a) is required to be issued.
This Court in a series of decisions, has consistently taken a view that the creditors of the transferee Company would have no right to intervene in the petition filed by the transferor Company under Section 391 of the Companies Act. Learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Industrial Credit & Investment Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra)
While the filing of the financial statements in XBRL format had begun for a class of companies, NBFCs were kept outside the purview, despite the fact that these companies also followed the Schedule VI format. Owing to peculiar nature of business as compared to the other Commercial and Industrial companies, a need was felt to […]
With a view to add transparency, fairness and independence in decision making to safeguard of stakeholders’ interest, the concept of Independent Directors was introduced. While the concept was till date applicable on Listed Public Companies, the New Company Law proposes to introduce the same upon big Public Companies as well.
