Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Delhi High Court observed that evidence placed on record lends credence to the fact that the applicant was not merely the paper director but was a director who was actively involved in the working of the SBFL.
SAT Mumbai observed that it is not open to a shareholder to complain about the scheme of arrangement before the SEBI or to the Stock Exchange nor is it open to the shareholder to make a representation and /or file an appeal before this Tribunal under Section 15T of the SEBI Act.
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. is pleased to announce the appointment of Arun C Mohan as an ‘Of Counsel’ in the Firm’s
The NCLAT held that there is no law which allows a third party or shareholders to settle the claims of Financial Creditor on behalf of the Corporate Debtor, M/s McDowell Holdings Limited.
Khaitan & Co advised Rockwell Automation International Holdings LLC (along with its nominee Rockwell Automation Inc.) in the 100% acquisition of shares
The Singapore Court of Appeal’s recent landmark judgment in Anupam Mittal v. Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings has been making waves for
The Court has a duty to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice and when an award has been passed without complying with the mandatory principles of natural justice, this Court being the custodian of rights and liberties of parties must take its guard to correct the infirmities which have already been carried out.
Calcutta High Court | Krishna Rao, J., held that under Companies Act, 2013, Civil Courts have jurisdiction to enquire into
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A Bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice A.I.S Cheema, Member (Judicial) and Kanthi Narahari,
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice A.I.S Cheema, Member (Judicial) and Balvinder Singh, Member (Technical) observed that a
Constitutional Court of South Africa: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Mogoeng, CJ. Dlodlo, Goliath, Petse, AJ, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, and
Supreme Court: Explaining the term ‘dividend’ under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Court said that the said provision