Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2016 (11) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 167 - Tri - Companies LawEntitlement to move an application for conducting the investigation in to the affairs of Respondent 1 Company under Section 213 of Companies Act, 2013 - Held that:- There is no dispute that the applicant's shareholding is 37% in the equity capital of Respondent-I M/s R.S. India Wind Energy Pvt Ltd. Therefore, the applicant fulfils the criteria prescribed under Sub Clause (a) of Sec 213 and is entitled to move an application for conducting the investigation in to the affairs of Respondent 1 Company under Section 213 of Companies Act, 2013. The purpose of investigation is to discover something which is apparently not visible to the naked eyes. The petitioner has brought out some apparent malpractices in the working of Respondent 1 Company to show that deeper probe is necessary. There has been complaint of mismanagement in the affairs of Respondent-I company. The applicant has also made out a good case by showing that there has been prima facie violations of the provisions of Companies Act in the maintenance of the minutes of various proceedings of the Respondent-I company. Apparent misdeeds and dishonesty in the maintenance of minutes of the company in contravention of the provisions of the Act cannot be ruled out. Law makes the investigation comprehensive of all sorts of illegalities. Sub clause 1 clause (b) of section 213 is wide enough to include contravention of any law. There has been prima facia existence of malpractices in tampering of records, which cannot be overlooked. In the facts, it appears that deeper probe in the affairs of Respondent No. l company is necessary. There is also a prayer in the company application for an investigation in to the affairs of Respondent 11 Power Wind Ltd. However it has not been explained in the application as to under what circumstances a probe is necessary against Respondent 11 Company. In the absence of sufficient material to show that affairs of Respondent 11 Company necessitates investigation, the same cannot be allowed.
|