SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Del) 507

MOHD.SHAMIM, S.B.WAD
P. B. GHAYALOD – Appellant
Versus
MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.B.DIWAN, M.S.Vinayak, MUKUL ROHTAGI, P.A.Rao

MOHD. SHAMIM

( 1 ) THE petitioner through the present writ petition wants this court to quash the termination order dated 14-9-1990 whereby his services were terminated by the respondents.

( 2 ) THE submissions of the petitioner are that Maruti Udyog Ltd. , Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as respondent) is a Government company as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. It was incorporated on 24th November, 1981 and became a "deemed public company" under section 43-A (i) of the Companies Act, 1956 w. e. f. 24th January, 1983. The Joint Venture agreement and the license agreement were signed with Suzuki Motor Company on 2-10-1982. The equity participation in between Government of India (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2 for the sake of brevity) and the Suzuki Motor Company is in the ratio of 60 : 40. Respondent No. 1 is completely under the control of respondent No. 2 under the Ministry of Industry which is managed by a Chairman, under the superintendence and control of Board of Directors who are appointed by the Central Government and are removeable by it. It is this veil behind which the Central Government operates through the instrumentality of the re













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top