Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2009 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (6) TMI 582 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAOppression and mismanagement - Whether the Company Law Board both on facts and in law erred in allowing the petition though the second respondent has not made out a case and further it committed an error in coming to the wrong conclusion that there was a deadlock in the company without assigning valid reasons for the same? Held that:- The learned presiding officer of the Company Law Board came to the right conclusion and held it could not be conclusively stated that the share transfer form, letter of undertaking and the letter of resignation do contain the signature of the second respondent and there is no material to establish the approval of the impugned transfer in favour of the third respondent or acceptance of the resignation of the second respondent from the office of the director. The said findings of fact recorded by the Company Law Board in exercise of its powers in a summary procedure after careful perusal of the same and comparison of the disputed document with that of the admitted document cannot be disputed. The Company Law Board has rightly exercised its power under section 402 of the Companies Act and granted the relief to the second respondent. The third respondent who is the aggrieved person could have come before this Court questioning the correctness of the order but not the appellant and is one more strong circumstance against it for not interfering with the impugned order. Appeal dismissed.
|