Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2022 (8) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 71 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BENCHOppression and Mismanagement - allegation of oppression of rights of petitioner by respondents no. 2 and 3 relating to affairs of respondent no. 1 company though he is holding more than 35% shares - it is also alleged that respondent no. 2 is mismanaging the company's affairs - seeking to restrain respondents no. 2 and 3 from creating any third party interest in the property owned by respondent no. 1 company - section 241-242 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the petitioner holds more than 35% of the shares. Respondent no. 2 is managing the day-to-day affairs of respondent no. 1 company. On 05.03.2021, respondent no. 2 on behalf of the company executed the agreement to sell of company's property viz. Final Plot No. 135/B in Survey No. 349/2 Paiki and 350/2 Paiki of the sim of Dariapur-Kazipur of Taluka Asarwa of Sub-District Ahmedabad-6 (Naroda) in favour of one M/s. J.K. Aai Ma Realty Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner wanted to stay execution, implementation, and operation of the sale agreement dated 05.03.2021 - Such injunction cannot be issued for the simple reason that the purchaser of the property is not a party here. If any such order is passed, it will greatly affect the proposed purchaser's right in the property although he had already paid a sum of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- to respondents no. 1 to 3. Now, because of the dispute between two brothers who are having an equal shareholding in respondent no. 1 company, the third party should not suffer. Moreover, the Civil Court has already seized with that dispute. Coming back to one material fact that although respondent no. 2 received a sum of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on behalf of respondent no. 1 company but did not account for the cash component of Rs. 50,00,000/-. Hence, it is opined that respondent no. 2 appears to be mismanaging the affairs of the company. In such a situation, the company's other assets are required to be preserved till the disposal of this petition. Hence, respondents no. 1 to 3 are directed to maintain the status quo in respect of other assets of the company other than mentioned in the agreement dated 05.03.2021 till the disposal of the main company petition. Application disposed off.
|