Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2021 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 1258 - HC - Companies LawInitiation of action in the matter of acquisition of shares and amalgamation of companies - offences under Sections 447, 448 and 449 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The facts reflected in the record reveal that the genesis of the present PIL is the scheme of amalgamation which was approved by this Court vide order dated 26.03.2015 in Company Petition No.182/2014 [2015 (3) TMI 1399 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and this Court has approved the scheme of merger in respect of three companies namely M/s. Vidya Investment and Trading Company Private Limited, M/s. Regal Investment and Trading Company Private Limited and M/s. Napean Trading and Investment Company Private limited. The present appellant who does not have any interest in the aforesaid companies and having an oblique idea and motive, has taken the large number of steps to challenge the scheme of amalgamation through various writs. The genesis of the present writ appeal is the merger of three companies and the very same subject matter was questioned in the PIL, which has been withdrawn unconditionally. The order passed by the Division Bench has not been challenged before any Court or any forum. Undisputedly, the legal effect and consequence of the unconditional withdrawal of the said PIL is to bar and prohibit all subsequent proceedings before any Court or Tribunal, raising the same contentions - This Court really fails to understand as to how in case of merger of three private companies, the funds of Government of India have been siphoned. On the contrary, on account of the order passed by the High Court of Delhi, the Central Government has passed an order dated 10.11.2017 and the same makes it very clear that the Government of India was not having any stake in the three amalgamating companies. This Court is of the considered opinion that the writ petition is nothing but sheer abuse of process of law. The appellant has been unsuccessful on almost about nine occasions by filing the frivolous proceedings. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in imposing the exemplary costs while dismissing the writ petition - Appeal dismissed.
|