sterlite buyback judgment

All the FASB, SEC and EITF provide related information to the case. Despite we must consider the main data. Two contracts, one for

The matter was presented to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) and AAT has different views on this matter and AAT considered the historical Cases and

The best way to explain the procedures to submit an appeal is to contact the

(case name & citation = 5 pts; facts = 10 points; decision = 10 pts)

This is a 2000 word RBI on Article 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation) and Article 86 (Absence without leave)

The land in Stratford is being actively traded, rather than being held for income producing

The Company will need to disapply its pre-emption rights in accordance to s 561 of CA 2006 and enable its director 's authority to allot under s 551 of CA 2006. The Company 's shares of the same class should have the same voting rights and comply with all legal requirement in pursuant of LR 2.2.2R. The Company must also remove the restrictions on transfer of

The revaluation of the evidences by superior court in connection with their erroneous evaluation of subordinate instance in this case takes place. The alteration of the judgment by appellate instance can be substantiated by new evidences if they have been researched during appeal trial under the petition of the criminal proceedings

Salamon v. Salamon & Co. Ltd has a significance principle that has been recognised universally. Refer to s16(5) in The Act, once company is registered, the new company is a juristic person that separate from its members. Likewise, company has the full responsible on its own debts and contractual

of minority shareholder claims (personal and derivative) for oppression under Section 216 of the Companies Act.

The thesis deals with the above concepts and discusses how the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (the Act) modified the law, particularly, by extending the legal capacity of a company and extinguishing or modifying the above rules which had previously restricted a company's ability

Chief Justice M. Hameedullah Beg., Justice N. L. Untwalia, Justice P. N. Bhagwati, Justice P. S. Kailasam, Justice S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer and Justice Y. V. Chandrachud.

them, and supported the claim of excess lands being given away. The Apex Court rejected both the claims of fraud and excess land being given and the Government was asked to pay costs of Rs. 5lakh to the company. The apex Court also asked the High Court to initiate criminal proceedings against the chief secretary and another officer of the state Government for not telling the whole truth in their sworn affidavits.

• No penal deed by supplementary stock exchanges and manipulating powers in past three years.

2. Improper use of name (Section 147): Under sub-section (4) of this section, an officer of a company who signs any bill of exchange, hundi, promissory note, cheque wherein the name of the company is not mentioned in the prescribed manner, such officer can be held personally liable to the holder of the bill of exchange, hundi