Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2011 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (3) TMI 1459 - HIGH COURT OF DELHIWinding up - Petitioner-company filed a reference with BIFR - In said reference, BIFR observed that it was just and equitable and in public interest to wind up company - In course of appeal proceedings, interim application was filed by respondent No. 1, seeking impleadment - In impleadment application, respondent No. 1 averred that there were inter se disputes in group which were sought to be settled through arbitration, though award was pending challenge; and that given stake of respondent No. 1 in company if show-cause notice issued by BIFR evincing a prima facie view to wind up company was confirmed by AAIFR, grave prejudice would be caused to applicant as he would have had no opportunity to file a proposal for its revival - In terms of impugned order amongst other directions, a direction came to be issued allowing said impleadment application - Held that:- respondent No. 1 had right to present his point of view. since proceedings before AAIFR were second step arising from orders passed by BIFR whereby it had come to a prima facie view to wind up petitioner-company, AAIFR had deemed it appropriate to implead respondent No. 1 as a party. therefore, there was no reason to exercise jurisdiction under article 226 to interfere with impugned order
|