Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2009 (8) TMI 691

..... gned from the accused-company as early as on 13-3-1998, the respondent had not taken his resignation into consideration.

Thus Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the court feels that due to non-application of mind by the respondent the petitioner has been arrayed as the third accused in EOCC No. 114 of 2007 on the file of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Egmore, Chennai. Hence, the court is warranted to interfere with the proceedings in EOCC No. 114 of 2007, and quash the same as against the petitioner/third accused alone. Criminal original petition allowed. - CRL. O.P. NO. 35361 OF 2007 - 5-8-2009 - C.S. KARNAN, J. Rajah and Venkatesan for the Appellant. S. Haja Mohideen Gisthi for the Responden .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... section 162 of the Companies Act, every officer of the company, who is in default shall be punishable with fine. Further, the offences under section 159 of the Act is a continuing one, within the meaning of the section 472 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, no question of limitation arises. Hence, the accused have to be punished for the above default. 4. The petitioner s/accused No. 3 s contention is that he was a non-executive director of the first accused-company and he resigned as early as 13-3-1998, itself. So, he cannot be held responsible for the alleged violations that occurred in the year 2006. Whatever the complaint which has been made against the accused persons will not bind the third accused/the petitioner herein. Th .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... rting his case, has filed nine documents. The second document is the petitioner s letter to Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. The third document is the extract of minutes of the 388th meeting of the board of directors of Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd., held on April 4, 1998, in which it was recorded that the petitioner (A.L. Mudaliar) resigned as director of the said company with effect from 13-3-1998 . 6. Learned counsel argued for their respective parties. The petitioner s counsel cited a judgment of the Bombay High Court in Saumil Dilip Mehta v. State of Maharashtra [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 4431 . The operative portion of the said judgment is as follows :- When a director has tendered his resignation and the board of directors has accepted it and has ac .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||