TMI Blog1998 (6) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apter VI of the Act before the CLB questioning among others the decision to raise the authorised and paid-up capital, the issue and allotment of 4,000 equity shares of Rs. 100 each to the sixth respondent of C.P. No. 17 of 1996 as well as the appointment of the respondent No. 4 as the director. The CLB did not accept the plea of oppression due to non-appointment of N.K. Pinch (petitioner there) as director the appointment of Rajib Pincha (Respon- dent No. 4) as the new director. The CLB however on assessment of the fact situation, set aside the allotment of 4,000 shares to the sixth respon-dent. To resolve the impasse, the CLB ordered both the groups to offer their bid for the shares in the company and whoever offers the highest bid, is to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and one of the directors from the side of the respondents. The above order contains the following stipulations: "The unsecured loans provided by the respondents which according to them is of the order of Rs. 27.5 lakhs and subject to verification by the statutory auditors, shall also be paid during this period. All the payments shall be by way of demand drafts in the name of Shri CM. Pincha, and shall be handed over to L.P. Agarwala Co., advocates on record, under acknowledgment. Should there be any default in making the payment of either the first instalment on the stipulated date or balance on or before August 11, 1998, as stipulated in our order dated June 9, 1997 the respondents will be at liberty to purchase the shares of the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount shall be paid in one or more instalments within a period of six months from the date of sale. All interim orders are vacated except the one relating to keeping in abeyance the decision taken in the recently held EOGM. The above directions have the concurrence of the parties and dictated in their presence." 2. Mr. Anil Kumar Bhattacharyya, the learned senior counsel, assisted by Ms. Usha Barua, Mr. Apurba Sarma, Mr. Arup Kumar Sharma, for the appellants assailed the above order mainly on the ground that the CLB erred in law in handing over the management of the company to the respondents without any consideration against the shares held by the appellants. Mr. Bhattacharyya, the learned counsel, found fault with the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n secured by the Constitution, so as to have become a constitutional right, is dependent entirely on statute and subject to the control of the Legislature. "Although it has been said that appeal exists by grace of statute or court rule, a right of appeal cannot be conferred by court rule, or broadened by court rule. Where the Legislature has prescribed limitations on the right, such limitations cannot be enlarged by a court."(14, Corpus Juris Secundum, Volume 4). 6. The order impugned here now is only a step in aid in implementation of the earlier order of the CLB which has already attained its finality. The parties acted upon the order passed by the CLB on 10-1-1997, and offered their respective bids. The impugned order contains th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
