SC: Forfeiture of Earnest Money Impermissible When Both Buyer and Seller are at Fault  ||  Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence Cannot Defeat Speedy Trial; Pre-Trial Detention is Punishment  ||  SC: Terrorist Act under UAPA Includes Conspiracies to Disrupt Essential Supplies, Not Just Violence  ||  Supreme Court Directs Measures to Prevent False and Frivolous Complaints Against Judicial Officers  ||  SC: Mere Participation in Arbitration Doesn’t Bar Challenging Arbitrator; Waiver Must be in Writing  ||  SC: Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the Plaintiff, as Dominus Litis, Cannot be Forced to Add a Defendant  ||  SC: Law Does Not Change With a New Bench; Decisions of a Coordinate Bench are Binding  ||  Delhi HC Absence of Formal Arrest under Section 311A Crpc Does Not Bar Giving Handwriting Samples  ||  Del HC: Security Guards Performing Duties Cannot Be Prosecuted For Wrongful Restraint or Molestation  ||  Bombay HC: Housing Society Earning From Telecom Towers Isn’t An ‘Industry’; Staff Get No Gratuity    

COMPANY - SC: Companies Act Does Not Stipulate Any Fixed Period for Completion of Serious Fraud Investigation - (28 Mar 2019)

COMPANY

SC while holding that there is no stipulation of any fixed period for completion of a Serious Fraud investigation observed that stipulation in Section 212(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, in relation to the submission of the report, is not mandatory, but directory.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   SECTION 212(3) OF THE COMPANIES ACT   2013   SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved