Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
MADHURESH PRASAD, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA
Sajal Dutta – Appellant
Versus
Reserve Bank of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. formation and initial funding of the ruby general hospital. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. challenges related to writ proceedings and petitioners' positions. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. claims of oppression and board dynamics. (Para 15 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 23) |
| 4. arguments about maintainability of the writ petition. (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 26) |
| 5. arguments on the rbi's authority regarding share issuance. (Para 25 , 27 , 30 , 32) |
| 6. the role of shareholder rights in judicial proceedings. (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 7. permissibility of importing second-hand equipment. (Para 36 , 37 , 39 , 40) |
| 8. validity and implications of rbi's decisions. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 9. clarifications on approvals related to share allotment. (Para 45 , 46 , 48 , 49) |
| 10. judicial review limitations on rbi's authority. (Para 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 11. res judicata and previous findings related to share issues. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 12. dismissal of the appeal. (Para 57 , 58) |
JUDGMENT :
MADHURESH PRASAD, J.
1. The Ruby General Hospital Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company) was incorporated in the year 1991 by two non-resident Indians Dr. Kamal Dutta and Binod Prasad Sinha a
Individual shareholders possess the right to challenge statutory permissions affecting their interests, affirming judicial review against administrative authority actions under specific legal framewo....
The court ruled that the Board's resolution regarding a merger does not violate Company Act provisions, and the necessity for shareholder approval under Section 293 was not substantiated.
The cancellation decision was within the authority of the RBI, and the petitioner's admission of guilt and the opportunity of a personal hearing satisfied the principles of natural justice.
Foreign award enforceable under Sections 48-49 Arbitration Act is executable as decree; no separate executability test or prior RBI approval under FEMA required; prior objections on compliance/valuat....
Financial irregularities – Impead of parties - Disputes in question can be effectively, completely and properly be adjudicated in the absence of applicant – Hence cannot be impleaded
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
