Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2010 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (10) TMI 81 - HC - Companies LawWhether section 66(6) of the CA was meant to cover only such cases where the DG(I&R) took suo motu notice under section 11(2) of the MRTP Act and investigations were incomplete at the time of the CAA 2009? Held that:- If any of the petitioners suffer any prejudice on account of the non-furnishing of any information to them by the CCI, they could well raise such a contention before the CCI which will then deal with such contention and pass orders thereon before proceeding to take any action in terms of section 43, read with section 45 of the CA. In any event, for any alleged violation of the procedure by the CCI it is not as if the petitioners would be without a remedy. Such a situation is taken care of within the four corners of the CA itself. This Court finds no ground having been made out by the petitioners for interdicting the proceedings before the CCI. Appeal dismissed.
|