0262-2016 Kalidas Dutta vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others
Full text
where no director is so specified then all the directors would be “officer who is in default”. In the present case, no material is brought on record to show that any of the officers set out in clauses (a) to (c) of Section 5 or any specified director of BREDL was entrusted to discharge the obligation contained in Section 73 of the Companies Act, 1956. In such a case, as per Section 5(g) of the Companies Act, 1956 BREDL and all the directors of BREDL are liable. Therefore, decision of the WTM that all 10 directors of BREDL including the appellant would constitute “officer in default” c
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
You have read the preview. Create a free account to read the full order, track this party, and analyse it in Ontology.
Free accounts include 10 searches/day with full order access.
Source: SecMarx — 0262-2016 Kalidas Dutta vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (bench, timelines, appeal chain) is cited to us.