SANJAY YADAV, ASHOK KUMAR JOSHI
State of Madhya Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Jiwaji Rao Cotton Mills (In Liquidation) Gwalior thr. the Official Liquidator – Respondent
ORDER :
Sanjay Yadav, J.
1. This appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act takes exception to order dated 05.11.2004 passed in Company Case No.4/1997 whereby an application preferred by the appellant, State of Madhya Pradesh through its Commerce and Industries Department claiming title over several parcels of land leased out by erstwhile Gwalior State to the Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. Birla Nagar, Gwalior / M/s Birla Brothers has been negatived.
2. Relevant facts leading to the controversy are that M/s Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd (for short “J.C. Mills”) a company registered under the Companies Act moved an application under Section 439 of he Companies Act, 1956 (in short Companies Act) for winding up of the company in view of the opinion expressed by Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction recorded in its proceedings dated 23.01.1995 as the company was unable to pay its dues.
3. In the winding up proceedings the State of Madhya Pradesh through the Officer-in-charge moved an application on 19.12.1997 pointing out that the land on which the J.C. Mills and its other buildings are situated belongs to the State of Madhya Pradesh being successor of erstwhile Gwalior State wh
Badrilal Vs. Municipal Corporation of Indore
Bejoy Gopal Mukherji Vs. Pratul Chandra Ghose
Bhanwnji Lakhamshi v. Himatlal Jamnadas Dani
Hamidullah (dead) by his legal representatives and others Vs. Abdullah and others
In A.S.N Nainapillai Marakayar and Ors. v. T.A. R.A. Rm. Ramanathan Chettiar
In Bejoy Gopal Mukherji v. Pratul Chandra Ghose
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.