Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1960 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHIOppression and mismanagement - refusal of interim orders - siphoning off of funds - during the pendency of this Appeal, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi has pronounced Judgement in OMP 382/2016 and OMP 396/2016 filed by Respondents 2 to 4 vide which they had raised objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble High Court, in the context of the Award is dealing with not merely the present Respondent Company but also other entities of the parties and is, inter alia, seized with questions of division of assets, movable and immovable. The Appellant himself has in the IA 13/2017 in OMP 326/2016 sought appointment of Receiver to take charge of the assets including factory premises, books of accounts, operations of the Bank Accounts, plant and machinery, etc. He has also sought forensic audit of the books of accounts of Respondent Company and other companies to identify siphoning of funds. It can be seen from the observations of the Orders of the Hon’ble High Court referred to in above para – 16D that it has called upon the parties to place on record various steps required to be taken to implement the complete separation between the parties in terms of the MOU and DOA. It can also be seen that the Hon’ble High Court has observed that the Court is still seized of the matters and several orders have been passed towards effectuating the division of the units among the parties. There is no dispute that in a petition like the present one, the question of oppression and mismanagement would be matters which are required to be exclusively dealt with and decided by the NCLT. For Interim Orders, it would be necessary in the application to spell out a prima facie case which requires interference of the Tribunal without which interference, it has to be shown that the Applicant/Petitioner would suffer irreparable injury and that balance of convenience lies in the fact that Interim Orders should be passed. If the present matter is perused and the reliefs as sought by the Appellants – Petitioners are seen, when it appears from the record that on the basis of documents executed between the parties an Arbitration Award has been passed and the Hon’ble High Court has while dealing with the OMPs filed by the parties passed different orders, it does not appear that the Appellants are able to show prima facie case, as regards the counts on which prayers were made before NCLT. The parties when they would be acting in response and in compliance to the directions and orders of the Hon’ble High Court in the proceedings pending before the Hon’ble High Court and take steps to comply with the provisions of the Companies Act, would naturally not be required to worry. As the Company Petition is pending, any steps taken by the parties, which are not in consonance with or not by way of compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court, which do not comply with the provisions of the Companies Act and Rules, would naturally attract the principles of lis pendens. Appeal dismissed.
|