Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Dhabe, J
Indian Hotels Co. Ltd. v. Bhaskar Moreshwar Karve and Another
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. s.630 of the companies act is a penal provision. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. accused claims promised sale at book value. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. previous attempts to quash prosecution rejected. (Para 5 , 6 , 18) |
| 4. interim decisions affect trial proceedings. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. improper practices undermine judicial fairness. (Para 9 , 10 , 20) |
| 6. no concluded contract for flat sale. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 7. accused's claims of promissory estoppel rejected. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 8. doctrine of promissory estoppel not applicable. (Para 17) |
| 9. court addresses complex ownership disputes. (Para 19 , 22) |
| 10. employee's past does not justify wrongful retention. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 11. proceedings restored for trial; revision allowed. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
1. This proceeding is reminiscent of the allegoric reference to the proverbial serpent that attempted to sting the hand that was feeding it milk. Harsh as this may seem, a narration of the facts would indicate how appropriate the analogy is, the central issue canvassed in the case being one that is customarily pleaded as a defence in prosecution under S.630 of the Companies Act, 1956 , the law on the point requires to be settled. It has almost become routine
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
