Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2019 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 293 - HC - Companies LawSuit for declaration and permanent injunction - time limitation - rejection of the plaint on the ground that the same was barred by law - Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure - Section 58 of the Companies Act - HELD THAT:- In the instant case it is not the plaintiffs’ allegation that the company had refused to register or transfer shares in favour of the plaintiffs. Thus, the decisions relied upon by Mr. Mitra in ADESH KAUR VERSUS EICHER MOTORS LIMITED AND ORS. [2018 (8) TMI 836 - SUPREME COURT] and SHASHI PRAKASH KHEMKA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANOTHER VERSUS NEPC MICON (NOW CALLED NEPC INDIA LTD.) AND OTHERS [2019 (2) TMI 971 - SUPREME COURT] are distinguishable on facts. The next point as to whether the decision of the Company Law Board would prevent the Civil Court from deciding the issues relating to the relief claimed with regard to the family arrangement, in my opinion, the proceedings and the findings of the Company Law Board will have to be gone into at the time of trial as a separate issue. Similarly limitation being a question of law and fact unless there is evidence before the Court, the issue cannot be decided. Reading of the plaint in this case simpliciter could not persuade the Civil Court to do decide the suit was barred at its initial stage. Revision dismissed.
|