Tuesday, June 30, 2009

SCRA_2

The Mewar Rural Financial Corporation, Udaipur, established under a special statute issued 5 years bonds to public directly and not through any Stock Exchange. Decide whether the said act of the Mewar Rural Financial Corporation is in violation of the provisions of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956.

SCRA_1

MIs Goyanka & Company, which is a member of a recognised stock exchange desire to-buy and sell shares of Crossroads Company Limited on their own count as well as on behalf of investors. Advise MIs Goyanka & Company whether there are any restrictions for dealing in securities on their own count under the provisions of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Companies Act_Practical Problems_86

The Board of Directors of XYZ Ltd;. filled up a casual caused by the death of Mr. P by appointing Mr. C as a director on 3rd April, 2009. Unfortunately Mr. C expired on 15th May, 2009 after working about 40 days as a director. The Board now wishes to fill up the casual vacancy by appointing Mrs. C in the forthcoming meeting of the Board. Advise the Board in this regard.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Practical Problems_Sales of Goods Act_7

‘A’ raised a loan by pledging a Railway Receipt of goods in transit, as security, with a money lender ‘X’. ‘A’ got the Railway Receipt back from ‘X’ in order to get the goods released from the Railways. Instead, ‘A’ pledged the same Railway Receipt with another lender ‘Y’, to raise another loan. In a suit for recovery filed by ‘X’, ‘Y’ pleads estoppels against ‘X’ for not endorsing the Receipt “Under Lien Pledge” and thus, representing that the said receipt is free from lien, which facilitated ‘A’ to raise a second loan against the receipt. Decide, if estoppel is rightly invoked by ‘Y’ against ‘X’?

Monday, June 15, 2009

Practical Problems_Sales of Goods Act_6

The plaintiff, a butcher bought a carcass of a goat from the defendant, who was a meat shopkeeper in a meat market. The plaintiff in ignorance of the fact that it was exposed to tuberculosis, offered it for sale. It was seized by a Food Inspector, who adjudged the same as unfit for consumption, and condemned it to be destroyed. The plaintiff was also fined. Thereafter the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant to recover the amount of fine and damages for breach of warranty under the Sale of Goods Act. The defendant pleaded that by usage of trade such an implied warranty was excluded. Decide.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Practical Problems_Sales of Goods Act_5

B’ purchases a motor car from ‘A’ which he uses for some months. It turns out that the car sold by ‘A’ to ‘B’ was a stolen one and has to be restored to the rightful owner. ‘B’ brings an action against ‘A’ for the return of the price. Will he succeed? Decide giving reasons.

Practical Problems_Partnership Act_12

‘A’ and ‘B’ are carrying on the business of grain merchants, in partnership. It is provided in the partnership deed that disputes relating to the affairs of the business would be preferred to arbitration. Arbitrators decided in favour of ‘A’. ‘B’ refuses to abide by the award. ‘A’ sues for enforcement of the award. Incidentally the firm is not registered under the Indian Partnership Act. Can A file case in this situation ?