Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2010 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 1069 - DELHI HIGH COURTWhether the courts below adopted the right perspective while deciding that the civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit? Held that:- The correspondence addressed to defendant No. 1 had made a prayer seeking issuance of duplicate share certificates. Section 113 laid down the period of limitation for issuance of such certificates. The company also sought for certain other details from the plaintiff which as per the plaintiff included the registered folio numbers as also affidavit and the indemnity bond which have been furnished by the plaintiff to the defendant company. It was thus now in the domain of the Company Law Board to make the necessary rectification in the register of members. As is evident from the averments made in the plaint and the prayer clause of the plaint, these prayers of the plaintiff could have been answered only by the Company Law Board. There is no perversity in the findings in the impugned judgment. No interference is called for. Substantial question of law is answered accordingly. Appeal dismissed.
|