Companies Act 2013 judiciary-2

Out of court settlement during ongoing Insolvency Process?

Vivek Bansal Vs Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)

Vivek Bansal Vs Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi) In a recent judgment (Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 552 of 2020, dated 14-07-2020), the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) held that a company could exit an ongoing insolvency process even as an interim resolution professional had been appointed and a...

Read More
Posted Under: Corporate Law | |

Dispute of Inheritance of Shares cannot be decided under Companies Law: SC

Aruna Oswal Vs Pankaj Oswal & Ors. (Supreme Court)

Aruna Oswal Vs Pankaj Oswal & Ors. (Supreme Court) Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the basis of the petition is the claim by way of inheritance of 1/4th shareholding so as to constitute 10% of the holding, which right cannot be decided in proceedings under section 241/242 of the Act. Thus, filing of the petition […]...

Read More

Transfer of Shares | Case Analysis | Dove Investments v. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corp.

M/s. Dove Investments Private Ltd. Vs. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. (Madras High Court)

Whether the obligation to register a transfer of shares within a particular period of time was mandatory or directory? Whether the company can cancel or reject the transfer where stamps on transfer form were not defaced or canceled?...

Read More

Increase in threshold for initiating CIRP is prospective in effect

Foseco India Limited Vs Om Boseco Rail Products Limited (NCLT Kolkata)

Whether increase in threshold by CG through notification  for initiating CIRP is prospective or retrospective in effect?...

Read More
Posted Under: Corporate Law | |

Is apprehension of bias a valid ground to substitute IRP

State Bank of India Vs. Metenere Ltd. (NCLAT)

NCLAT concluded that the apprehension of bias expressed by the ‘Corporate Debtor’ qua the appointment of Verma as proposed IRP is valid and cannot be dismissed. Further, it contended that the NCLT order was justified in seeking substitution of Verma to ensure that CIRP is conducted in a fair and impartial manner....

Read More
Posted Under: Corporate Law | |

Bombay HC dismisses NCLT plea to ban Deloitte and BSR for 5 years

N Sampath Ganesh Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court had upheld the constitutional validity of Section 140(5) of the Companies Act but held that it would not apply to auditors who had resigned and also squashed the prosecution or the criminal complaints filed by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) against the erstwhile auditors of Infrastructure Leasing and Finan...

Read More

Suo Moto NCLAT Delhi order under Insolvency, Competition & Company Law

Suo Moto (NCLAT Delhi)

That the period of lockdown ordered by the Central Government and the State Governments including the period as may be extended either in whole or part of the country, where the registered office of the Corporate Debtor may be located...

Read More
Posted Under: Corporate Law | |

NCLAT dismisses pleas of IL&FS auditors Deloitte & KPMG against impleadment

Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP. Vs Union of India (NCLAT)

Various acts  of IL&FS like over borrowing were prejudicial to the public interest which had cascading impact on various sectors of the economy and the red signals were raised against the IL&FS by the country and even by the department of economic affairs of the country, therefore, before passing any appropriate order in public interest ...

Read More
Posted Under: Corporate Law | |

Difference between ‘Adjudicating Authorities’ & ‘Court’: NCLAT clarifies

Vijay Pal Garg & Ors. Vs Pooja Bahry (NCLAT)

Adjudicating Authorities cannot possess the power to direct the Central Government to conduct/order the investigation against any company. Taking a look at Section 210(3) of the Act, it is clear that the Central Government ought to conduct an investigation into the affairs of the Company by appointing an inspector and obtain his report th...

Read More

HC: No interim relief to directors who were disqualified u/s 164(2)

Satish Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)

Where a director was disqualified under section 164(2) of the Companies Act 2013 for not filing Financial Statements and Annual Returns continuously for a period of three years, then, the disqualification was incurred and no interim relief  was to be granted for the same as these were ministerial or administrative act of filing which was...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,874)
Company Law (6,370)
Custom Duty (7,864)
DGFT (4,272)
Excise Duty (4,381)
Fema / RBI (4,297)
Finance (4,540)
Income Tax (33,967)
SEBI (3,601)
Service Tax (3,579)

Search Posts by Date

August 2020