Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 173 - HC - Companies LawValidity of proceeding with the civil suit - dispute between the parties is covered under the provisions of the Companies Act or not - whether after incorporation of Section 430 of The Companies Act, 2013 w.e.f. 1.6.2016, the civil Court is barred to proceed with the civil suit already pending before it? HELD THAT:- In the present case, the parties are at variance with regard to the issue of duplicate share certificate. In the backdrop of the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in SHRIPAL JAIN VERSUS TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. AND ORS. [1995 (3) TMI 494 - SC ORDER] and followed by the Bombay High Court in NINE MEDIA & INFORMATION SERVICES LTD. VERSUS HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD. & OTHERS [2016 (10) TMI 370 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and the aforestated provisions of the Companies Act, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is manifest that the dispute between the parties is a company matter and not a civil dispute as held by the learned trial Court. After incorporation of new Companies Act, 2013 such matters has to be heard and decided by the Company Law Tribunal constituted under the new company law and is the only competent authority and has jurisdiction under the law to decide the conflict between the parties in respect of any company matter. It can hold enquiry into the matter under Section 84 of the Act, 1956 or 46 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with the Companies (Issue of Share Certificates) Rules, 1960 or The Companies (Share Capital and Debentures) Rules, 2014 and take a decision in the matter. In all the judgments cited by the petitioner, the disputes between the parties were found to be related to the company matters as enshrined in the Companies Act; like increase of authorized capital, allotment of shares or bonus shares, appointment of directors etc., therefore, they were relegated to the competent authorities constituted under the Companies Act. In this case also the conflict between the parties is found to be the dispute covered under the Companies Act, therefore, applying the above dictum of law, the petition is allowed. The order of the learned Trial Court dated 22.11.2019 delivered by XVth Civil Judge Class-I, Indore is set aside. The matter is pending since last 10 years, therefore, the Tribunal is directed to decide the matter within 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of the matter following the due process of law. No adjournment shall be given to the parties except in unavoidable circumstances. Petition allowed.
|