Facts About Lawyer In Chandigarh Revealed

Manning(2), The Queen Advocates (visit the site) v. Ganguli, prosecution witness No. The second ground on which, in our opinion, the appeal must succeed, is based on the findings of the High Court itself This case involved a consideration of a large volume of documentary evidence almost all in English. -ThiS appeal by special leave arises out of an industrial dispute between the appellant M/s. Their permits continue for the normal period and the considerations which are laid down in clauses (f) and (g) which have been thereby added to sections 47 and 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, would come into 40 play when these permits which have expired by lapse of time come to be considered for renewal on applications made by permit holders in that behalf.

In support of the first contention raised on behalf of the appellant strong reliance was placed on the 213 recent decision of this Court in Topan Das v. Rose Valley by making public issue of debentures during the period between 2001-2002 to 2007-2008, without complying with the public issue norms, violated the provisions of erstwhile SEBI (Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 and the provisions of Section 117(A) of the Companies Act, 1956 and other provisions of SEBI Act which is a Scheduled Offence under PMLA.

225 lakhs from 2585 persons by issuing secured debentures to the general public without complying with the norms related to IPO of securities as per first provision to Section 67(3) of the Companies Act, 1956. The learned adjudicator considered the pleas raised, and the evidence led, by the parties before him, investigated into the financial position of the appellant and pronounced his award on October 9, 1953, on all matters referred to him. The cases, The Queen v. Further, on perusal of various offences listed in the Schedule in 28 Paragraphs, it could be seen that only penal provisions of the Statutes have been incorporated in the Schedule.

The following Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR J. He was neither armed with some authority or representative character nor were his duties immediately auxiliary to those of some one who was so armed. From the information provided by ROC, it was observed that Rose Valley had raised a total sum of Rs. By their order dated July 31, 1952, the Government of West Bengal referred thirteen matters for adjudication to Shri S. He was not employed to exercise to some extent and in certain circumstances the delegated function of Government and, therefore, was not an "officer" within the meaning of that term as used in section 21(9), Indian Penal Code.

10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Provided further that the licensing authority shall not issue a new driving licence to the applicant, if he had previously held a driving licence, unless it is satisfied that there is good and sufficient reason for his inability to obtain a duplicate copy of his former licence. The two positions, therefore, are not similar and the permit holders under Orissa Act I of 1949 do not fall in the same class or group as the permit holders under Orissa Act XXXVI of 1947.

The High Advocates (more bonuses) Court had made the following observations as to the nature of the case and the requisite qualifications of the members of the jury necessary for a proper under. State of Bombay(1) and the rulings relied upon in that case. There is no denying the fact that Section 24 of the SEBI Act is a penal provision of inclusive nature and thus it clearly reflects the legislative intent of a scheduled offence under PMLA.

Thompson(3) and The King v. The complaint reveals that SEBI received a letter from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Office of the Registrar of Companies ("ROC"), West Bengal, with reference to Rose Valley in which the ROC had stated that Rose Valley has repeatedly issued debentures in the years 2001-2002, 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2007- 2008 to more than 49 persons in each financial year without filing offer documents with either the ROC or the SEBI and requested SEBI to investigate into the matter.

These permits may or may not be renewed in favour of these permit holders but the non- renewal of such permits would not be on a par with the premature termination or cancellation of the permits held by the owners of stage carriage services to whom the provisions of Orissa Act XXXVI of 1947 were applied. 26 -Agent of the Bank-was examined at great length, and be gave his evidence on 12 days between October and December, 1949, It runs into about 45 typed pages.

This 645 evidence appears to have been given by him in English because he put in an application that he had given the evidence in English and that he was not in a position to say Advocates (visit the site) whether the Hindi version as recorded by the deposition- writer was the correct version, as he was not familiar with Hindi. Niyogi who was appointed to constitute the Sixth Industrial Tribunal for adjudication under s. Admittedly, the complaint was filed by SEBI against the appellant on the allegation of committing offence punishable under Section 4 of PMLA.

The fact remains that Section 24 of Advocates (visit the site) the SEBI Act is inclusive in nature and also includes Section 12A within its ambit and scope. If he was thus not an officer of the Government, he could not be a public servant within the meaning of section 21, Indian Penal Code nor could he be a public servant for the purposes of Act 11 of 1947 and could not be convicted of the offence under section 5(1)(d) of Act II of 1947. The Bill inter alia provides for (a) modification and amplification of certain definitions of new type of vehicles ; Therefore, the proposed legislation has been prepared in the light of the above background.

Plummer(4) were cited in support of the contention that where all the accused persons except one are acquitted on a charge of conspiracy, the conviction of one only on that charge cannot Advocates (visit the site) be sustained. The oral evidence was directed mainly to connect those documents and to explain their bearing on the charges framed against the accused, of criminal breach of trust and falsification of relevant accounts and entries in the registers maintained by the Bank.

In this connection the recent decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Kannangara Aratchige Dharmasena v. In these circumstances, we have to note that the evidence of the two Civil Surgeons and that of the auditor would be the foundation for the case against the appellant and that being the case, it seems to us that they ought to have been examined in court. , and its Workmen represented by Bengal Aluminium Workers' Union.

Crown Aluminium Works, Belur, represented by Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd.