Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2009 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (7) TMI 796 - HC - Companies LawWhether fraudulent petitioner had deceived the applicants into believing that a particular state of affairs existed when subsequent disclosure by the petitioner in terms of the order showed otherwise? Held that:- There is no illegality involved in the present case. The defaulting broker may have itself applied and the applicants in their wisdom may have allowed the transactions. There was no compulsion on the applicants to concede or consent to the order; at least no submission has been made to such effect. If the applicants volunteered to acquiesce in a state of affairs which was within their authority to do, their shouting fraud would not permit the undoing of the consent order. Though the word fraud has been mentioned a few times in the application, no particulars of fraud have been furnished. The application refers to the codes "CLI" and "PRO" without mentioning as to whether it was possible for the applicants to ascertain the true beneficial owner of the shares on the basis of the documents already available with them prior to the order dated July 5, 1999. The consent or concession on the part of the applicants that is evident from the order appears to be a voluntary relinquishment of a known right and merely because the implication of the order dawned on them after they had consented thereto is not good ground for the order being recalled despite their repeated incantation of fraud. Appeal dismissed.
|